High Court of KeralaWP(C)/12294/2015disposed of

Sushama Saju v. State Of Kerala

2015-04-10Honourable Mr.Justice P.R.Ramachandra Menon4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL 2015/20TH CHAITHRA, 1937 WP(C).No.12294 of 2015 (J) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER:

------------------- SUSHAMA SAJU,MANGLATHU VEEDU, KUTTIKATTUKARA.

BY ADVS.SMT.K.P.SANTHI SRI.R.JAYAKRISHNAN (MUTHUKULAM) SRI.RILGIN V.GEORGE SMT.E.U.DHANYA RESPONDENT'S:

------------------------- 1.

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT,SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, FORTKOCHI-682001.

R1 & R2 BY SENIOR GOVT. PLEADER SRI.K.C.VINCENT. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-04-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.P(C) NO.12294/2015 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXT.P1:TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.6052/2007. EXT.P2:TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 25.3.2015 OF THE VILLAGE OFFICER,KADUNGALLOOR.

EXT.P3:TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 2.3.2015 SUBMITTED TO 2ND RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:

NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE pk

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

-------------------------------------------- W.P(C). No. 12294 of 2015 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of April, 2015

J U D G M E N T

The case of the petitioner is that the property belonging to the petitioner comprised in Sy.No.16/-2, 16/-6/2-4, 16/3 of Kadungallur Village, Paravur Taluk is actually a dry land, though the same stands described as ' Nilam' in the revenue records. It is also stated that the said property has not been included in the data bank register. Because of wrong description in the revenue records, the petitioner is not in a position to enjoy the property in a better and effective manner. In the said circumstance, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 application before the 2nd respondent/Revenue Divisional Officer and the prayer is to cause the same to be considered and disposed of within a reasonable time.

2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well, who submits that the actual position/nature of the property is not discernible and as such, for causing disposal of Ext.P3, a report has to be obtained from the Local Level Monitoring Committee.

WP(c). No.12294 of 2015 3.

In the said circumstance, the 2nd respondent /Revenue Divisional Officer is directed to call for a report from the Local Level Monitoring Committee and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3 in accordance with law, which shall be done after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The proceedings as above shall be finalised at the earliest, at any rate, within 'two months' from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment . The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the 2nd respondent/Revenue Divisional Officer for further steps.

The writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/- P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.