Kerala High Court
WP(C)/41419/2016 of HAJI A AHMED FAIZAL SHA Vs THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE on 30 December 2016
COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2016/9TH POUSHA, 1938 WP(C).No. 41419 of 2016 (B) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------- 1. HAJI A AHMED FAIZAL SHA S/O.HAJI T.K.ABDUL KARIM, AGED 39 YEARS,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2016/9TH POUSHA, 1938
WP(C).No. 41419 of 2016 (B) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):-------------
1. HAJI A AHMED FAIZAL SHA S/O.HAJI T.K.ABDUL KARIM, AGED 39 YEARS, RESIDING AT 5/99, AL-BARAKAH, PUDUNAGARAM AMSOM, DESOM, CHITTOOR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. A.ANUB SHA S/O.HAJI T.K.ABDUL KARIM, AGED 37 YEARS, RESIDING AT 5/99, AL-BARAKAH, PUDUNAGARAM AMSOM, DESOM, CHITTOOR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. A.ANISH SHA S/O.HAJI T.K.ABDUL KARIM, AGED 31 YEARS, RESIDING AT 5/99, AL-BARAKAH, PUDUNAGARAM AMSOM, DESOM, CHITTOOR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ
RESPONDENT(S):-------------- 1. THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE PERUVAMPE GRAMA PANCHAYATH, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER, AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, PERUVAMPE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN 678 503. 2. THE DISTRICT LEVEL AUTHORISED COMMITTEE PALAKKAD DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER [RDO], PALAKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN 678 503.
R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. VINEETHA HARIRAJ
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30-12-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 41419 of 2016 (B) ---------------------------- APPENDIXPETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS-----------------------EXHIBIT-P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT OF THE PROPERTY OF THE FIRST PETITIONER DATED 21.10.2016 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER; PERUVAMPE VILLAGE.EXHIBIT-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT OF THE PROPERTY OF THE SECOND PETITIONER DATED 21.10.2016 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER; PERUVAMPE VILLAGE.EXHIBIT-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT OF THE PROPERTY OF THE THIRD PETITIONER DATED 21.10.2016 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER; PERUVAMPE VILLAGE.EXHIBIT-P4 TRUE COPY OPF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE DRAFT DATA BANK OF THE PERUVAMPE VILLAGE.EXHIBIT-P5 TRUE COPY OF THE RESPRESENTATION DATED 6.12.2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS-----------------------NIL// TRUE COPY //P.A. TO JUDGEsou.
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P(C) No.41419 of 2016
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 30[th] day of December, 2016
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
JUDGMENT
The petitioners seek that the entries relating to the classification of their property in the draft data bank be corrected inaccordance with law. However, according to them, this has not beenconsidered by the authorities concerned and they have, therefore,filed this writ petition for necessary orders.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and thelearned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of therespondents.
3. I have been informed by the parties on either side that thedata bank now available is only a draft one. I do not, therefore, seeany reason why corrections cannot be made thereon, in accordancewith law, if proper applications are made by the petitioners. In suchcircumstances, I direct the first respondent to consider Exhibit P5application of the petitioners, after obtaining the recommendationsand clearances of all the authorities, including the Agricultural WP(C).41419/16
-:2:-
Officer, in accordance with law and in accordance with theapplicable Act and Regulations, within a period of two months fromthe date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
No further orders are required in this writ petition. The writpetition is, therefore, disposed of with the above direction.
krj.31/12
Sd/-Devan Ramachandran, Judge