Nazarulla Vs. State of Kerala

Nazarulla vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Nov 06, 2013

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1097422

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1097422
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice P.R.Ramachandra Menon
Decided On: Nov 06, 2013
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Nazarulla

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....w.p.(c). no.26052 of 2013 -------------------------------------------- dated this the 6th day of november, 2013 judgment the petitioner has approached this court with the following prayers: " i) that a writ of mandamus or other order be passed directing the 2nd respondent to consider ext.p9 and the various documents produced before him and pass an order within a time to be fixed by this hon'ble court after hearing the petitioner. ii) that a writ of certiorari or other order be passed quashing ext.p6 and directing the respondents to restore the property of the petitioner detailed in ext.p6 in the name of the petitioner in all revenue records. iii) that a writ of mandamus or other order be passed directing the 3rd and 4th respondents to restore back the property of the petitioner detailed in ext.p9 to the petitioner or initiate land acquisition proceedings and pay the compensation to the said property to the petitioner and his brother." 2. when the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the grievance of the petitioner has been highlighted by way of ext.p9 which is w.p.c. no.26052 of 2013 -2- pending consideration before the 2nd respondent and that the petitioner will be satisfied, if a direction is given to the said respondent to consider and dispose of the same within a reasonable time.3. heard the learned government pleader appearing for the respondents.4. considering the limited nature of relief sought for, this court does not find it necessary to go into the merits of the case. in the said circumstance, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on ext.p9 in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other interested party, if any, at the earliest, at any rate, within 'two months' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. the petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE6H DAY OF NOVEMBER201315TH KARTHIKA, 1935 WP(C).No. 26052 of 2013 (F) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- NAZARULLA, S/O. SAINULABDEEN, VELIVILAGAM, PERUMATHURA, SHARKARA VILLAGE, CHIRAYINKEEZHU TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS.SRI.G.S.REGHUNATH, SRI.K.RAJESH KANNAN, SRI.A.S.SHAMMY RAJ, SRI.P.SHANES. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT (REVENUE), SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

2. THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

4. CHIEF ENGINEER, HARBOUR ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K.T. LILLY. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON0611-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Prv. W.P.(C).NO.26052/2013-F: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1- TRUE COPY OF THE PARTITION DEED NO. 1606/1949 DATED1712-1949. EXHIBIT P2- TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT DATED289-83. EXHIBIT P2(A)- TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT DATED289-83. EXHIBIT P2(B)- TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT DATED63-78. EXHIBIT P2(C)- TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT DATED184-77. EXHIBIT P3- TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE OF PETITIONER'S FATHER. EXHIBIT P4- TRUE COPY OF THE THANDAPPER RECEIPT. EXHIBIT P5- TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT REGISTER IN THE NAME OF MYTHEEN PILLAI MYMOON AND P.PATHUMMAL. EXHIBIT P6- TRUE COPY OF THE G.O(MS) 205/2007 DT. 12-6-2007. EXHIBIT P7- TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE VILLAGE OFFICER, DATED1610-2006. EXHIBIT P8- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER

DATED245-2010 OF THE3D RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P9- TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT BEFORE THE2D RESPONDENT AS EARLY AS ON237-2010. EXHIBIT P10- TRUE COPY OF THE ARGUMENT NOTE FILED BEFORE THE2D RESPONDENT DATED241-2011. EXHIBIT P11- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER

DATED298-2013 OF THE1T RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

======================== W.P.(C). No.26052 of 2013 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of November, 2013 JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers: " i) That a writ of mandamus or other order be passed directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P9 and the various documents produced before him and pass an order within a time to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court after hearing the petitioner. ii) That a writ of certiorari or other order be passed quashing Ext.P6 and directing the respondents to restore the property of the petitioner detailed in Ext.P6 in the name of the petitioner in all revenue records. iii) That a writ of mandamus or other order be passed directing the 3rd and 4th respondents to restore back the property of the petitioner detailed in Ext.P9 to the petitioner or initiate land acquisition proceedings and pay the compensation to the said property to the petitioner and his brother." 2. When the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the grievance of the petitioner has been highlighted by way of Ext.P9 which is W.P.C. No.26052 of 2013 -2- pending consideration before the 2nd respondent and that the petitioner will be satisfied, if a direction is given to the said respondent to consider and dispose of the same within a reasonable time.

3. Heard the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

4. Considering the limited nature of relief sought for, this Court does not find it necessary to go into the merits of the case. In the said circumstance, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P9 in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other interested party, if any, at the earliest, at any rate, within 'two months' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the 2nd respondent for further steps. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. kp/-

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2013 Same Parties Nazarulla vs State of Kerala Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice P.R.Ramachandra Menon