Kerala High Court
V.J.Joseph @ Kunjumon vs State Of Kerala on 23 December, 2000
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
MONDAY,THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY 2014/16TH POUSHA, 1935
WP(C).No. 31486 of 2013 (I)
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S) :
-----------------------
V.J.JOSEPH @ KUNJUMON
AGED 58 YEARS, S/O. V.T. JOHN @ PAAPPU, VADASSERY HOUSE,
PALLURUTHY, KOCHI.
BY ADV. SMT.M.A.ZOHRA
RESPONDENT(S) :
-------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER,
OFFICE OF THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
COLLECTORATE, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM - 682 030.
3. THE SUB COLLECTOR,
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, FORT KOCHI.
4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
RAMESWARAM VILLAGE OFFICE, PALLURUTHY
KOCHI - 682 001.
5. V.P. DAVIS @ DEVASSY,
S/O. PAPPACHAN, HOUSE NO. 912, VADASSDRY
A/18, WATER LAND ROAD, PALLURUTHY
KOCHI - 682 006.
BY SRI.P.K.SOYUZ, SP. GOVERNMENT PLEADER (REVENUE)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06-01-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
AMV
: 2 :
WP(C).No. 31486 of 2013 (I)
--------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :
-------------------------------------
EXHIBIT-P1- COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED NO. 6266 OF 2000 DATED
23/12/2000 OF THE SUB REGISTRAER'S OFFICE, KOCHI.
EXHIBIT-P2- COPY OF THE BUIDLING PERMIT DATED 18/04/2001.
EXHIBIT-P3- COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 13/07/2012 OF THE BANK.
EXHIBIT-P4- COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BETWEEN THE
PETITIONER AND VINU SAVIOUR
EXHIBIT-P5- COPY OF THE 2 STOP MEMOS DATED 01/12/2012 AND
02/05/2013 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT-P6- COPIES OF THE PROHIBITORY ORDERS DATED 01/04/2013 AND
02/09/2013 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT-P7- COPY OF THE COUNTER STATEMENT FILED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED
09/10/2013.
EXHIBIT-P8- COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT,QUERY UNDER THE R.T.I ACT,
REPLY AND THE RECORD RETAINED REGARDING THE
PETITIONER'S PROPERTY IN THE VILLAGE OF WHICH ONLY
WHILE COPY WIHTOUT SEAL.
EXHIBIT-P9- COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 26/11/2013 SENT BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL
---------------------------------------
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE
AMV
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
---------------------------------------
W.P.(C) NO. 31486 of 2013 (I)
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 6th day of January, 2014
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers :
i) To issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing Ext.P9 report as illegal and also P5 and P6 prohibitory orders of respondents 4 and 3, respectively as illegal, in the interest of justice;
ii) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents 3 and 4 to stop the illegal actions taken against the petitioner with regard to the enjoyment of his property in Survey No.690 and 676/1 of Rameswaram Village which is purayidom as per the village records and which is not nilam as available in the date bank;
iii) to issue appropriate direction to the 3rd and 4th respondents to produce the records before this Honourable Court pertaining to the petitioner's property as available in the village records and basic tax register in spite of which they issued Exts.P5 stop memos and P6 prohibitory orders leading to Ext.P9 report;
iv) to grant such other and further reliefs deemed fit to be granted by this Honourable Court in the facts and circumstances of the above matter; and W.P.(C) NO. 31486 of 2013 (I) 2
v) to grant the cost of this proceedings.
2.When the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue is pending consideration before the 2nd respondent by way of Ext.P9 and that the petitioner will be satisfied, if a direction is given to the said respondent to have it considered and finalised within a reasonable time.
3.Heard the learned special Government Pleader for the 3rd respondent as well.
4.Considering the limited extent of relief sought for, this Court does not find it necessary to issue notice to the 5th respondent for the time being. The writ petition is disposed of, directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P9 in accordance with law, of course after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and also to the 5th respondent, which shall be done at the earliest, at any rate, within 'two months' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. W.P.(C) NO. 31486 of 2013 (I) 3 The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the 2nd respondent for further steps.
sd/-
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE AMV