Unni v. State Of Kerala

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF MAY 2015/8TH JYAISHTA, 1937 WP(C).No. 31187 of 2009 (P) ---------------------------- PETITIONER :

----------- UNNI, AGED 56 YEARS, S/O.KUNJUMUHAMMED, MADATHATTU HOUSE, NEDUVANOOR KARA, CHENGAMANADU VILLAGE, ALUVA TALUK.

BY ADV. SRI.PAUL K.VARGHESE RESPONDENTS :

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

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY (LAND & REVENUE), GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DISTRICT SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS, COLLECTORATE, ERNAKULAM.

BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SOJAN JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29-05-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 31187 of 2009 (P) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.P1 :

COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.4906/1979 DTD.28.11.1979 OF ANGAMALY S.R.O.

EXT.P2 :

COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD.12.12.2007.

EXT.P3 :

COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT ISSUED BY THE 2nd RESPONDENT DTD.15.12.2007.

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS :- NIL.

True copy P.A to Judge

ANIL K.NARENDRAN, J.

---------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.31187 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 29 th day of May, 2015

JUDGMENT

The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the second respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P2 application filed for rectification of certain mistakes occurred in the Re-survey records pertaining to the property covered by Ext.P1 sale deed.

2.

A counter affidavit has been filed by the second respondent, in which it has been stated that Ext.P2 application has already been disposed of after surveying the land and that the Surveyor who had inspected the land on 28.3.2008 with notice to the petitioner, has reported that the land in question did not have any specific boundaries. Hence the land cannot be put in a separate sub-division and for that reason mutation cannot be effected. 3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is yet to receive a copy of the decision taken on Ext.P2 representation.

W.P.(C)No.31187 of 2009 4.

I heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Government Pleader for the respondents.

5.

Taking note of the stand taken by the 2nd respondent in the counter affidavit that Ext.P2 application has already been disposed of by the District Head Surveyor after surveying the land with notice to the petitioner, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions:- The second respondent shall communicate a copy of the order passed on Ext.P2 application to the petitioner within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the aforesaid order, it is for him to challenge the aforesaid order before the appropriate forum without any delay.

Sd/- ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE skj