Kerala High Court
G.Sadanandan vs The Commissioner Of Land Revenue on 4 April, 2013
Author: P.R. Ramachandra Menon
Bench: P.R.Ramachandra Menon
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
MONDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL 2013/18TH CHAITHRA 1935
WP(C).No. 9834 of 2013 (D)
---------------------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
----------------------
G.SADANANDAN, AGED 68 YEARS,
S/O.GOPALA PANICKER, THEKKUVALAKATH KEEZHE VEEDU
VENGANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM NOW RESIDING AT ANAND BHAVAN
CHAVADI NADA, VENGANOOR P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADV. SRI.D.KISHORE
RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
1. THE COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
3. THE ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER
VENGANOOR VILLAGE
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 695 523.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. SRI.K.C.VINCENT
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08-04-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
tss
WP(C).No. 9834 of 2013 (D)
-------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-------------------------------------
EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE SECONDARY SCHOOL
LEAVING CERTIFICATE.
EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF THE RELATIONSHIP CERTIFICATE DATED 4.4.2013 ISSUED
BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF THE THANDAPPER REGISTER DETAILS RELATING TO THE
PROPERTY IN RESURVEY 393/13.
EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.11.1974 IN OS 719/71 OF MUNSIFFS
COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
EXHIBIT P5. TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 9.10.1975 OF THE REVENUE
INSPECTOR.
EXHIBIT P6. TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.B11/85046/09 DATED 17.5.2012 OF
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
---------------------------------------
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
tss
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
....................................................
W.P.(C). No. 9834 of 2013
......................................................
Dated this the 8th day of April, 2013
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is stated as aggrieved of Ext.P6 order passed by the 2nd respondent under the relevant provisions of Kerala Escheats and Forfeitures Act 1964.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, there is absolutely no rhyme or reason for having issued Ext.P6, in so far as the petitioner happens to be the son of the deceased, in respect of whom no proceedings could have been taken with reference to the provisions of the above Act as the deceased is survived by a legal heir. It is further pointed out that, the petitioner was never let known of any such proceedings, nor was given any opportunity of hearing before the proceedings were finalized as per Ext.P6. The petitioner came to know about the said proceedings only when the Village Officer came to inspect the property on 31.03.2013. There is an endorsement/signature of the Village Officer on Ext.P6 on 03.04.2013. The learned counsel further submits that, the petitioner is having remedy by W.P.C. No. 9834 of 2013 -2- way of appeal under Section 7 before the 1st respondent and that the petitioner would like to pursue the remedy accordingly. The petitioner is stated as constrained to approach this Court only because of the proceedings sought to be pursued hastily by the respondents, so as to allot the land in question to some land less persons.
3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.
4. If the version of the petitioner is true, that he is the surviving legal heir of the deceased (in respect of whom the proceedings have been finalized as per Ext.P6), there could not have been any proceeding leading to Ext.P6. This of course is a matter which requires to be considered. The learned Government Pleader brought to the notice of this Court that, there was a Gazette notification dated 13.04.2010 and that deposition of some persons residing in the nearby locality was also taken, before passing Ext.P6. But this cannot tilt the balance in any manner, unless the case projected by the petitioner is turned down, showing that the petitioner is not the legal heir of the deceased person.
W.P.C. No. 9834 of 2013 -3-
5. After hearing both the sides, the petitioner is relegated to avail the statutory remedy under the Act. If any such an appeal is filed before the 1st respondent within 'two weeks' from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment, the same shall be considered by the 1st respondent and appropriate orders shall be passed in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner at the earliest, at any rate, within 'three months' thereafter. 'Status quo' shall be maintained till such time.
The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the 1st respondent for further steps.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.
Kp/-