Kerala High Court
Unknown vs By Advs.Sri.T.Madhu on 4 October, 2017
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF MAY 2018 / 14TH VAISAKHA, 1940
WP(C).No. 14875 of 2018
PETITIONER(S)
-------------
LUCKY STAR ARTS AND SPORTS CLUB,
REG. NO.163/1994, KIZHUR, CHANDRAGIRI, KASARAGOD TALUK,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
MUKTHAR M, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O. M.A ,MOIDEEN KUNHI,
RESIDING AT M.A MANZIL, CHANDRAGIRI P.O, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.T.MADHU
SMT.C.R.SARADAMANI
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
KASARAGOD AT KANHANGAD, KANHANGAD P.O,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT - 671 123.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
KASARAGOD, VIDYANAGAR, P.O, KASARAGOD DISTRICT - 671 123.
BY SRI.PAUL ABRAHAM VAKKANAL, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04-05-2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
TS
WP(C).No. 14875 of 2018 (H)
--------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
----------------------
EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.3257/2017 DATED
4/10/2017 OF KASARAGOD SRO.
EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.1401/2006 DATED
18/5/2006 OF KASARAGOD SRO.
EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT DATED
3/1/2018 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KALANAD.
EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE
DATED 27/9/2017 ISSUED BY THE CHEMMANAD GRAMA
PANCHAYAT.
EXHIBIT P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PROPERTY TAX RECEIPT
ISSUED BY THE CHEMMANAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT
DATED 28/9/2017.
EXHIBIT P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE STOP MEMO DATED 17/1/2018
ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KALANAD.
EXHIBIT P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 8/2/2018
OF THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN,
CHEMMANAD.
EXHIBIT P8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 6/4/2018
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST
RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT(S)'EXHIBITS - NIL
-----------------------------
/TRUE COPY/
PS TO JUDGE
TS
05.05.2018
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J.
-----------------------------------------------
W.P. (C) No. 14875 of 2018
-----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 4th day of May, 2018
JUDGMENT
The petitioner alleges that he has invoked the statutory jurisdiction of the competent Authority under Section 6 of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order (KLU Order). The said application has been produced by the petitioner in this writ petition as Exhibit P8. The petitioner alleges that the said application is yet to be considered by the Authorities and that delay in consideration of the same is prejudicing him irreparably.
2. I notice that Exhibit P8 application is stated to be pending before the competent Authority under the KLU Order. It is the statutory function vested on the competent Authority by the specific provisions of the KLU Order. In such circumstances, W.P. (C) No. 14875 of 2018 -2- I see no impediment in the competent Authority under the KLU Order in taking up the application and considering the same.
3. However, it is the specific case of the petitioner that the property was re-claimed prior to 2008 and that it has been that it is not included in the data bank. They have produced Exhibit P7 in support of his assertion. If this is so, obviously, the competent Authority under the KLU Order is statutorily obligated to consider the application in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Revenue Divisional Officer v. Jalaja Dileep (2015 (1) KLT 984).
4. I, therefore, direct the competent Authority under the KLU Order before whom Exhibit P8 application is pending to consider the same and issue appropriate orders thereon in strict compliance with all the imperative and mandatory requirements and procedural prescriptions therein. This exercise shall be completed by the competent Authority not later than two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. W.P. (C) No. 14875 of 2018 -3-
5. The writ petition is ordered as above. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I make no order as to costs and the parties are directed to suffer their respective costs.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JUDGE EB/04.05.2018