Kerala High Court
M/S. Harrisons Malayalam Ltd vs State Of Kerala on 30 July, 2010
Author: Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan
Bench: Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI
MONDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2013/18TH BHADRA, 1935
WP(C).No. 25481 of 2008 (H)
----------------------------
PETITIONERS:
------------
M/S. HARRISONS MALAYALAM LTD.,
BRISTOW ROAD, WILINGDON ISLAND, COCHIN-682003
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER-LEGAL, M.V.H MENON.
BY ADVS.SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR
SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR
SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI
SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS
SRI.ANIL D. NAIR
RESPONDENTS:
------------
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARIAT
TO GOVERNMENT (REVENUE), SECRETARIAT
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2. DISTRICT SURVEY SUPERINTENDENT,
COLLECTORATE, KALPETTA, WAYANAD DISTRICT.
3. TAHSILDAR, VYTHIRI TALUK OFFICE,
VYTHIRI P.O., WAYANAD DISTRICT.
4. VILLAGE OFFICER, KOTTAPADY VILLAGE
OFFICE, VYTHIRI TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT.
5. A.K.VIJAYAKRISHNA VARMA RAJA,
AAYANCHERI KOVILAKAM, PURAMERI P.O., VADAKARA TALUK
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
ADDL. 6TH RESPONDENT IMPLEADED
------------------------------
ADDL.R6. ANILKUMAR, S/O.PADMANABHAN NAMBIAR,
MADATHIKANDI, PATHIYARAKKARA,
IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 30.07.2010 IN
IA.5275/2010.
R1 TO R4 BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER(REVENUE)
SMT.SUSHEELA R. BHAT
R5 BY ADVS. SRI.SAJJU.S
SRI.T.KRISHNAN UNNI (SR.)
SRI. K.SHAJ
ADDL.6 BY ADV. SRI.P.K.SURESH KUMAR
ADDL 6 BY ADV. SRI.K.ANAND
ADDL 6 BY ADV. SRI.PRADEESH CHACKO
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 7.3.2013, THE COURT ON 09-09-2013 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
VK
WP(C).No. 25481 of 2008 (H)
----------------------------
APPENDIX
---------
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
----------------------
EXT.P1. COPY OF THE DEED OF INDENTURE NO.2805 OF 1923 OF THE SRO
CHENGELPET.
EXT.P2. COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT NO.6500814 DATED 7.02.2004, ISSUED BY
THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOTTAPPADI.
EXT.P2(a). COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT NO.6509614 DATED 29.6.04 ISSUED BY
THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOTTAPPADI.
EXT.P2(b). COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT NO.4427553 DATED 15.05.2004 ISSUED
BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOTAPPADI.
EXT.P2(c). COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT NO.4435097 DATED 21.07.2004 ISSUED
BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOTTAPPADI.
EXT.P2(d). COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT NO.4435096 DATED 21.07.2004 ISSUED
BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOTTAPPADI.
EXT.P2(e). COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT NO.4721204 DATED 18.01.2005 ISSUED
BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOTTAPPADI.
EXT.P2(f). COPY OF THE TAX FRECEIPT NO.8252883 DATED 26.10.2006
ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOTTAPPADI.
EXT.P2(g). COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT NO.8252888 DATED 26.10.2006 ISSUED
BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOTTAPPADI.
EXT.P2(h). COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT NO.8290631 DATED 22.10.2007 ISSUED
BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOTTAPPADI.
EXT.P2(i). COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT NO.8290632 DAGTED 22.10.2007
ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOTTAPPADI.
EXT.P3. COPY OF THE COMPLAINT WITHOUT ENCLOSURE DATED 2.1.2006
SUBMITTED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXT.P4. COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 13.2.2008 FILED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXT.P5. COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 12.8.2008 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
vk
WP(C).No. 25481 of 2008 (H)
----------------------------
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS
----------------------
EXT.R1(a) . COPY OF ORDER DATED 26.07.1995
EXT.R1(b) . COPY OF THE G.O. DATED 31.05.2010.
EXT.R1(c) . COPY OF THE G.O. (MS) NO.145/11/RD DATED 05.03.2011.
EXT.R2(a) COPY OF THE STAY ORDER DATED 30.11.2011 IN OP 3508/2011,
EXT.R6(a). COPY OF DOC. NO.2969/2006 DATED 17.10.2006 OF SRO
VADAKARA.
EXT.R6(b). COPY OF COMMUNICATION DATED 25.1.2006 FROM THE DEPUTY
SURVEY DIRECTOR TO THE RECEIVER.
/ TRUE COPY /
P.A. TO JUDGE
VK
Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan
&
A.V.Ramakrishna Pillai, JJ.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = WP(C).No.25481 of 2008-H = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 9th day of September, 2013 Judgment Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J.
1.Heard.
2.The petitioner challenges the jurisdiction of the District Survey Superintendent to issue Ext.P5, purportedly proceeding to rectify certain entries and cancel Pattayam. In fact, we see that the learned single Judge had required the Government on 25.8.2008 to state the provision of law under which, the District Survey Superintendent can direct cancellation of Patta number issued to the petitioner.
WPC25481/2008 -: 2 :-
3.Looking at Ext.P5, we see that the Regional Joint Director and the Survey Department, as a whole, appear to be of the view that Patta numbers have been allotted by the Survey and Land Records Wing of the Government to persons who did not have title or Patta standing in their name. The conferment of such Patta number and receipt of tax is criticised in Ext.P5 itself.
4.On 28th February, 2013, the following order was issued:
"........If that were so, we need to be told as to what action followed, either by way of prosecution or disciplinary proceedings against the officers, who were involved in the alleged activity of creating such situations during the course of re-survey, throughout the State of Kerala. The citizens cannot be forced to run from pillar to post after survey or re-survey. They cannot also be made to wait endlessly in the corridors of administrative authorities and courts for remedy of records, if WPC25481/2008 -: 3 :- such records are unnecessarily interpolated or interfered with, without authority of law, by those purportedly acting under administrative, including statutory, power. We want the Government to tell us specifically about this on or before 7.3.2013,on which date, we will consider whether; having regard to the deep and perversive quality of corruption, nepotism, favouritism, and other factors that could glean, if such a situation is prima facie shown; as to why there shall not be an enquiry or investigation through an agency of the highest order as may be decided upon by this Court."
5.In spite of materials being placed on record to criticise all officers in one go and the writ petitioner company for attempting to get at Government lands into possession, the fact of the matter remains that there is no provision of law under which the District Survey Superintendent can direct cancellation of Patta. Under such circumstances, we cannot but hold that Ext.P5 is WPC25481/2008 -: 4 :- without jurisdiction.
6.Not only that, even a reading of Ext.P5 would show that the said exercise was prompted by some decision taken in the conference of the Regional Joint Director. This is not the manner in which a statutory power has to be exercised, even if there be one. That way also, the impugned order cannot be sustained.
In the result, this writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is quashed.
Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan Judge A.V.Ramakrishna Pillai Judge Sha/