Kerala High Court
Sara Joseph vs The State Of Kerala on 19 January, 2000
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2012/29TH KARTHIKA 1934
WP(C).No. 14224 of 2012 (C)
---------------------------
PETITIONER:
-------------
SARA JOSEPH, AGED 79 YEARS,
W/O LATE MATHEW E. JOSEPH, ERIKKATTU MADACKAL,
PUTHEN BANGLAW, ALUMOODU, THAZHATHANGADI,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.B.SAINU
SMT.BHAGYAM.K.
RESPONDENTS:
--------------
1. THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-1
3. THE SURVEY DIRECTOR,
VAZHUTHAKKADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1.
4. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT-INCHARGE OF TOURISM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1.
5. THE DISTRICT TOURISM PROMOTION COUNCIL,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
KODIMATHA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-1.
6. KITCO REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF TOURISM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1.
R1-R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.JOSEPH GEORGE
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
20-11-2012, ALONG WITH WPC. 14596/2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 14224 of 2012 (C)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO:1493/67.
EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.570/1110.
EXHIBIT P3(a): TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 19.1.2000.
EXHIBIT P3(b): TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE RDO DATED 7.6.2000.
EXHIBIT P3(c): TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE HONOURABLE REVENUE MINISTER.
EXHIBIT P3(d): TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR DATED
13.10.2000.
EXHIBIT P3(e): TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR DATED
20.10.2000.
EXHIBIT P3(f): TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3rd RESPONDENT DATED 15.11.2000.
EXHIBIT P3(g): TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE HON'BLE REVENUE MINISTER.
EXHIBIT P3(h): TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3rd RESPONDENT DTD.25/11/2000.
EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE DISTRICT
COLLECTOR DATED 08.06.2012.
EXHIBIT P5(a):RESPONDENTOF THE FORWARDING RECEIPTS ISSUED BY THE 2ND
TRUE COPY
TO THE ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR DATED
08/06/2012.
EXHIBIT P5(b):ADDL.TAHASILDAR, FORWARDING LETTER ISSUED BY THE
TRUE COPY OF THEKOTTAYAM TO THE VILLAGE OFFICE
DTD.14/06/2012.
EXHIBIT P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILS REGARDING THE SANCTIONED
PROJECT ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT.
WP(C).No. 14224 of 2012 (C)
EXHIBIT P7 :TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT.
EXHIBIT P8 :TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOS OF MY PROPERTY AND MY
NEIGHBOURING PROPERTY.
EXHIBIT P9 :TRUE COPY OF THE SIMILAR ISSUES THAT ARISING ALL OVER
KERALA IN THE MALAYALA MANORAMA NEWS PAPER DAILY.
EXHIBIT P10 :TRUE COPY OF THE B.T.R. (BASIC TAX RECEIPT).
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT R2(a) TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DTD.4/9/2012 PREPARED BY
THE TALUK SURVEYOR, KOTTAYAM.
EXHIBIT R2(b) TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SKETCH PREPARED BY THE TALUK
SURVEYOR, KOTTAYAM.
True copy
P.A. to Judge
T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C) Nos.14224 & 14596 of 2012
- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 20th day of November, 2012
JUDGMENT
In both these writ petitions the prayers are identical and they are disposed of together.
2. In W.P.(C) No.14224/2012 the petitioner claims that her husband was in possession of an extent of 3.333 cents covered by item No.2 in document No.1493/67 which is lying on the western side. Ext.P1 is the copy of the said document. The husband obtained the property from his mother as per Ext.P2 document and the petitioner's husband's family is in possession of the property for more than 87 years. The property is enclosed with well defined boundaries, comprised in old Survey No.1/1/21 in Kumannam Village in Kottayam District. They were away from the locality for a long time, and when they have returned for settling in their native place, they approached the Village Officer for remitting land tax, but it was told that the records were not available in the Village Office. Even though complaints were made, they were not traced out. The husband expired on 11.9.1993. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted various representations to the authorities to rectify the mistake occurred in the WPC.14224 & 14596 2012 - 2- resurvey. The representations filed by the petitioner have been produced as Exts.P3(a) to P3(h). Finally Ext.P4 was submitted before the District Collector which was forwarded to the Additional Tahsildar, Kottayam who in turn forwarded the same to the Village Officer. The said fact is clear from Exts.P5(a) and P5(b).
3. The writ petition was filed alleging that on 15.6.2012 for the execution of a project, viz. Thazhathangadi Heritage Zone and River Banks Beautification, constructions have been attempted in item 2 property in Ext.P1. The prayer in this writ petition is to direct respondents 5 and 6 not to enter into the property described in Document No.1493/67 and for a direction to the second respondent to take a decision on the basis of Ext.P4 application.
4. This Court by interim order dated 19.6.2012 directed to maintain status-quo as regards the property for a period of one week. The said interim order has been continuing. A modified interim order was passed on 11.7.2012. Therein, this Court directed the District Collector to arrange to conduct a survey and measurement of the properties of the petitioners in both the writ petitions in terms of the title deeds claimed by them and the revenue records. A local inspection was also directed to be conducted. It was further directed that respondents 5 and 6 can proceed with the work in question, but subject to further orders to be passed in the writ petitions.
WPC.14224 & 14596 2012 - 3-
5. In W.P.(C) NO.14596/2012 there are two petitioners who are claiming possession in respect of an extent of 2 cents of property described as item 2 in document No.2324/92 of Kottayam Sub Registry. They claimed that the said property in the possession of their family for more than 41 years and have been paying tax also. The property is clearly enclosed with well defined boundaries and comprised in old Survey No.1/1 in Kottayam Village. For rectifying certain mistakes in the resurvey, the petitioners have filed Ext.P4 representation to the District Collector which was forwarded to the Additional Tahsildar, Kottayam, who forwarded the same to the Village Officer for further action. This is evident from Exts.P5
(a) and P5(b). It is submitted that while the proceedings were pending before the Tahsildar, the sixth respondent has started some construction work which compelled the petitioners to approach this Court.
6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader.
7. The Additional Tahsildar, has filed separate counter affidavits in both the writ petitions. In the counter affidavit filed in W.P.(C) No.14224/2012 it is explained that as per the interim order dated 11.7.2012 the District Collector conducted a local inspection on 13.8.2012 along with the Revenue and Survey officials. A notice was also given to the petitioner regarding the inspection by the District Collector. The Taluk Surveyor WPC.14224 & 14596 2012 - 4- conducted a detailed measurement of the properties and prepared a report as well as a sketch which are produced as Exts.R2(a) and R2(b). In Ext.R2(a) report in the last paragraph it is mentioned that in respect of 3.333 cents of land, since the petitioner has not produced the patta or receipt showing payment of land tax, the property could not be earmarked in favour of the petitioner. It is also stated that if the petitioner produces documents, an extent of 3.333 cents out of the total extent of 5.164 cents in the possession of the petitioner, can be allotted after effecting sub division and the remaining extent can be retained as puramboke. In the similar counter affidavit filed in W.P.(C) No.14596/20912 also, Ext.R2(a) report and Ext.R2(b) sketch have been produced. In Ext.R2(a) report it is stated that on production of documents, 2 cents of property can be sub divided and given out of a total extent of 4.867 cents after earmarking the remaining portion as puramboke land.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the District Collector may be directed to pass appropriate orders after giving due opportunity to the petitioners to submit documents.
9. In the light of Ext.R2(a) report and Ext.R2(b) sketch prepared by the Taluk Surveyor in both the cases, there will be a direction to the District Collector to pass final orders after hearing the petitioners. The petitioners will produce necessary documents for enabling them to retain the respective WPC.14224 & 14596 2012 - 5- items of property, viz. 3.333 cents in W.P.(C) No.14224/2012 and 2 cents in W.P.(C) No.14596/2012. Appropriate orders will be passed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. It is open to the petitioners to produce original title deeds/tax receipts or extract of Basic Tax Register in support of their case. The interim orders will continue till orders are passed and the structures existing in the property of the petitioners will not be demolished.
The writ petitions are disposed of as above. No costs.
(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/