Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Shameer vs District Collector

Author: T.R. Ramachandran Nair

Bench: T.R.Ramachandran Nair

       

  

  

 
 
                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                            PRESENT:

                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

                THURSDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JUNE 2012/31ST JYAISHTA 1934

                                 WP(C).No. 14421 of 2012 (C)
                                 --------------------------------------

PETITIONER(S):
------------------------
          1. SHAMEER, AGED 64 YEARS
             S/O.VEERAN,
             MULAKKAL HOUSE
             VARODE AMSOM VARODE DESOM,
             OTTAPALAM TALUK
             PALAKKAD DISTRICT
             REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER
             VEERAN M.AGED 64 YEARS
             RESIDING AT MULAKKAL HOUSE, VARODE AMSOM
             VARODE DESOM, OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

          2. VEERAN.M.
             AGED 64 YEARS, RESIDING AT MULAKKAL HOUSE
             VARODE AMSOM, VARODE DESOM, OTTAPALAM TALUK
             PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

             BY ADV. SRI.P.JAYARAM

RESPONDENT(S):
--------------------------
          1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR
             PALAKKAD-678 001.

          2. THE SUB COLLECTOR
             OTTAPALAM-678101.

          3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER
             OTTAPALAM VILLAGE-1, OTTAPALM-679101.

          4. STATE OF KERALA
             REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY,
             DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
             GOVT.SECRETARIAT,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

             BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. MOHAMMED SHAH

           THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
            21-06-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


DCS

WP(C).No. 14421 of 2012 (C)



                                APPENDIX



PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS :-



EXHIBIT P1: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC.NO.4384/2012 HIGH COURT OF
             KERALA.

EXHIBIT P2: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 2/4/2012 IN LRGI-2012/26079/9 DISTRICT
             COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD.

EXHIBIT P3: COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 13/4/2012 FILED BY THE IST
             PETITIONER BEFORE 1ST RESPONDENT TO DROP THE
             PROCEEDINGS.

EXHIBIT P3(A): COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 13/4/12 FILED BY THE 2ND
                PETITIONER TO DROP THE PROCEEDINGS.

EXHIBIT P4:     COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 28/4/2012 ISSUED BY 1ST
                RESPONDENT TO 1ST PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P4(A): COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 28/4/2012 ISSUED BY 1ST
                 RESPONDENT TO 2ND PETITIONER.



RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS :- NIL




                                                 /TRUE COPY/




                                                 P.A. TO JUDGE




DCS




                      T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.
                   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                       W.P.(C) No. 14421 of 2012
                   - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                Dated this the 21st day of June, 2012

                                 JUDGMENT

The petitioners are aggrieved by the proceedings initiated under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008. The petitioners also seek for a declaration that the proceedings initiated are in violation of the provisions of the said Act.

2. The averments in the writ petition show that after the seizure of vehicle Nos.KL-51-1478 and KL-51A-749, the petitioners have approached this Court and the vehicles have been released by way of interim custody on furnishing bank guarantee. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in the absence of completion of various procedures under the Act by the various authorities who will have to identify the nature of the land, it is too premature for the District Collector to proceed with the matter and raising all these objections, the petitioners have filed Exts.P3 and and P3(a) petitions.

3. Therefore, substantially the contention is that the Local Level Monitoring Committee and the concerned authorities have not issued a notification under Rule 4(2)(b) of the Act with respect to the land WPC.14421/2012 - 2- comprised in Sy. Nos.93/6 and 93/8B of Ottapalam - I Village. The petitioners are also relying upon the judgments of this Court in Kaipadath Property Development Company (Pvt) Ltd. v. State of Kerala (2011 (1) KLT 526) and Firose v. Revenue Divisional Officer (2011 (1) KLT 868). All the contentions raised by the petitioners will be considered by the District Collector before passing orders.

4. There will be a direction to the first respondent to finalise the proceedings after hearing the petitioners, within a period of six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition. It is made clear that I have not considered anything on the merits of the matter.

The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.

(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/