Kerala High Court
Indira vs The State Of Kerala
Author: Shaji P. Chaly
Bench: Shaji P.Chaly
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
FRIDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017/21ST MAGHA, 1938
WP(C).No. 41420 of 2016 (B)
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-------------
INDIRA,
AGED 62, W/O.LATE MADHAVAN,
ELLIMATTATHIL HOUSE,
KEEZHPURAPUZHA KARA,
PURAPUZHA VILLAGE,
THODUPUZHA TALUK,
IDUKKI DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY
TO THE GOVERNMENT,
SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2. THE SUB COLLECTOR,
COLLECTORATE,
PAINAVU, IDUKKI.
3. THE TAHSILDAR,
TALUK OFFICE,
THODUPUZHA TALUK,
IDUKKI DISTRICT.
4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
PURAPUZHA VILLAGE,
IDUKKI DISTRICT.
5. BALAKRISHNA PILLA,
AGED 62,
KAVUMPURATH HOUSE,
KEEZHPURAPUZHA KARA,
PURAPUZHA VILLAGE,
THODUPUZHA TALUK,
IDUKKI DISTRICT.
EL
WP(C).No. 41420 of 2016 (B)
---------------------------
6. SOMANATHA PILLAI,
AGED 55,
MONIPILLIL HOUSE,
KEEZHPURAPUZHA KARA,
PURAPUZHA VILLAGE,
THODUPUZHA TALUK,
IDUKKI DISTRICT.
7. SHAIJU,
AGED 45,
KURUMBAYIL HOUSE,
KEEZHPURAPUZHA KARA,
PURAPUZHA VILLAGE,
THODUPUZHA TALUK,
IDUKKI DISTRICT.
8. NIDHEESH,
AGED 25,
THANNIPARAYIL HOUSE,
KEEZHPURAPUZHA KARA,
PURAPUZHA VILLAGE,
THODUPUZHA TALUK,
IDUKKI DISTRICT.
R1-4 BY ADV. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. RAVI KRISHNAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
10-02-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
EL
WP(C).No. 41420 of 2016 (B)
----------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
EXHIBIT-P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT BEARING NO 4309 OF 95 OF
THE THODUPUZHA SRO DATED 2.11.95.
EXHIBIT-P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT BEARING NO 3095 OF 95 OF
THE THODUPUZHA SRO DATED 18.7.95.
EXHIBIT-P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS NO 365 OF 2016 ON THE
FILE OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, THODUPUZHA 17/12/2016.
EXHIBIT-P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER PASED IN WP(C) NO 991
OF 2016 DATED 11.1.2016 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.
EXHIBIT-P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE LOCAL
AUTHORITY FOR BUILDING TAX ISSUED DATED 29.3.2011.
EXHIBIT-P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE LOCAL
AUTHORITY FOR BUILDING TAX ISSUED DATED 27/5/2015.
EXHIBIT-P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE LOCAL
AUTHORITY FOR BUILDING TAX ISSUED DATED 27/5/2015.
EXHIBIT-P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE FOR THE PROPERTY TAX
ISSUED TO BE REALIZED FROM THE PETITIONER DATED
2.5.2014.
EXHIBIT-P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE TALUK OFFICE
DATED 21.10.2016.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
R3(A) TRUE COPY OF BTR
R3(B) TRUE COPY OF TALUK SURVEYOR'S REPORT ALONG WITH SKETCH
TRUE COPY
P.S. TO JUDGE
EL
SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
--------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.41420 of 2016
-----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 10th day of February, 2017
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging Ext.P8 notice dated 21.12.2016 issued by the 3rd respondent purportedly in Form No.12 of Clause 17 of the Survey Manual, informing the petitioner that the boundary of the property will be fixed on 26.12.2016 at 11'o clock. Material facts for the disposal of the writ petition are as follows:
2. Petitioner along with two children filed Ext.P3 suit against respondents 5 to 8 in the Munsiff Court, Thodupuzha.
A writ petition also was filed before this Court, when there was an attempt to interfere in the property by putting up a bus shed in front of the same. According to the petitioner, no further proceedings are initiated stating that 'pramboke land' is involved and the boundary has to be fixed, for which purpose, notice is issued. On the date proposed for measurement of the property, the measurement took place and at any time now proceedings could be taken and finalized. It is thus challenging Ext.P8, basically contending that the same is not a W.P.(C) No.41420 of 2016 2 properly constituted notice as provided under the Kerala Survey and Boundaries Act, 1961 and the Rules appended thereto.
3. Third respondent has filed a statement, denying the contentions and allegations and claims and demands raised by the petitioner. It is also stated that petitioner filed an application to the 3rd respondent on 23.12.2016, claiming that she has filed O.S.No.365 of 2016 before the Munsiff's Court, Thoudupuzha, and obtained an injunction order in I.A.No.2504 of 2016. According to the 3rd respondent, the said suit is exclusively a private case in which revenue department is not impleaded. The petitioner requested to abstain from the execution of the notice or to re-consider the same in the light of the above order. It is stated that the notice is issued to measure only the 'Puramboke' land that comprised in Sy.No.403/10 and does not contravene standing order of any court. It is also stated that the title and possession of the said land completely vests with the Government and individuals hold no right over it. On the field verification report conducted by the Taluk Surveyor, it is obvious that the gate is constructed in Puramboke land, comprised in Sy.No.403/10 of W.P.(C) No.41420 of 2016 3 Block No.10 in Purapuzha Village. A copy of BTR and Taluk Surveyor's report is produced as Annexures R3(a) and R3(b) respectively. According to the 3rd respondent, petitioner is not entitled to get any reliefs as sought for in the writ petition.
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader and perused the documents on record and the pleadings put forth by the respective parties.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, I am of the considered opinion that a glaring mistake has taken place by issuing Ext.P8 notice in Form No.12 under the Survey Manual. A notice under Form No.12 of the Kerala Survey and Boundaries Rules should have been the appropriate notice issued to the petitioner. According to the petitioner, petitioner is seriously aggrieved by the mistake committed by the 3rd respondent.
6. I think, in the light of the rival contentions, a quietus can be given to the writ petition by issuing appropriate direction to the 3rd respondent. The 3rd respondent is directed to issue a suitable notice in the form provided under the Kerala Survey and Boundaries Rules, 1964. The respondents will also be at liberty to initiate suitable action under the Land W.P.(C) No.41420 of 2016 4 Conservancy Act by issuing appropriate notice, and by providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. A quietus shall be given to the whole issue within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till such time, the measurement done and the sketch prepared in respect of the property in question shall be kept in abeyance. The legal question raised in this writ petition will remain open to be agitated at a later point of time.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE //true copy// P.S. to Judge St/-
10.02.2017