Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 9TH CHAITHRA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 2002 OF 2022 PETITIONERS: E.P.RAJKUMAR AGED 69 YEARS S/O.E.P.MADHAVAN NAIR, LAKSHMI NIVAS, T.B. ROAD, OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679101 BY ADVS. SANTHEEP ANKARATH P.ANIRUDHAN RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001. 2 KERALA STATE LAND BOARD PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695033. 3 TALUK LAND BOARD OTTAPALAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679101. SMT.MABLE.C.KURIAN.SR.G.P. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 2002 OF 2022 2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner alleges that the action 'threatened' through Ext.P6 is egregiously improper, since the ceiling case against him, or the original declarent, had been concluded much earlier and cannot be reopened.
2. However, when this matter was called today,
Shri.Santheep Ankarath - learned counsel for the petitioner, confined his plea that competent respondent be directed to initiate and complete any action as has been proposed through Ext.P6, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
3. Even though the challenge to the action
proposed in Ext.P6 may not be possible for this Court to be decided affirmatively at this state, I am certain that it will be justified in acceding to the afore alternative request made by Shri.Santheep Ankarath.
4. At this time, the learned Senior Government
Pleader - Smt.Mable C.Kurian, pointed out that WP(C) NO. 2002 OF 2022 3 Ext.P6 was issued as early as on 22.11.2018 and therefore, that she has no instructions as to what is the stage of the action, if any, taken pursuant to it.
Taking note of the afore submissions, I order
this writ petition, to the limited extent of directing the 3rd respondent - Taluk Land Board to complete any proceedings that may have been initiated pursuant to Ext.P6, after following due procedure and after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard; thus culminating in an appropriate order and necessary action thereon, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. I leave full liberty to the petitioner to approach this Court again, after the afore exercise is completed and if he requires any further relief. Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE MC/30.3 WP(C) NO. 2002 OF 2022 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2002/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO. C.C. NO. 207/73 DATED 27.7.1982 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 21.1.1992 IN CRP NO. 2052/1983 PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 23.9.1999 ISSUED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN S.M. NO. 4/2005 DATED 23.8.2005 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF REPORT DATED 28.1.2017 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE NO. C.C. - 207/73 DATED 22.11.2018 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT AND RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER ON 30.1.2019.