High Court of KeralaCon.Case(C)/448/2015closed

V.T. Nicholas v. T.G. Teggy

2015-07-07Honourable Mr.Justice T.R.Ramachandran Nair3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 2015/16TH ASHADHA, 1937 Con.Case(C).No. 448 of 2015 (S) IN WP(C).14511/2012 ----------------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 14511/2012 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 28-06-2012 PETITIONER(S):

-------------------------- V.T. NICHOLAS AGED 61 YEARS S/O. LATE THOMAS, VIRAKODIYANAL HOUSE CHAPPANAMTHOTTAM P.O. KAVILAMPARA KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

BY ADV. SRI.SHAJI M.KURIAKOSE RESPONDENT(S):

----------------------------

1. T.G. TEGGY AGE AND FATTHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS THIRUVANANTAHPURAM 695001

2. AMANDEEP KAUR AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER THE DISTRICT (DIVISION) FOREST OFFICER KOZHIKODE 671001

3. P.K.MOHANTHI AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FOREST, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001 R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI K.K. SAIDALAVI THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-07-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C.O.(C)No.448 of 2015 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 7th day of July, 2015

JUDGMENT

Alleging non compliance of the direction issued in Annexure I judgment, this Contempt Case has been filed. The petitioner's case is that he was the owner in possession of 5 acres of land in R.S. No.175 of Kavilampara Village in Kozhikode District. He was evicted from 2 acres by the notification issued under the provisions of Kerala Forest (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Land). This Court directed the competent authority to expedite the proceedings and to take a final decision.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as of now a decision has been taken restoring 1.6 acres of land. It is also submitted that regarding the balance extent there is no decision at all. The second respondent will communicate a copy of the order issued in the matter and it is upto the petitioner, if he is aggrieved, to challenge it in appropriate proceedings. Leaving open the said remedy,

the Contempt Case is closed.

(T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE.) kav/