Kerala High Court
WP(C)/31471/2012 of PAULY Vs THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR on 31 December 2012
COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2012/10TH POUSHA 1934 WP(C).No. 31471 of 2012 (H) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------- 1. PAULY, KATTUMATH HOUSE,CHENGALURE VILLAGE MUKUNDAPURAM
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
MONDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2012/10TH POUSHA 1934
WP(C).No. 31471 of 2012 (H)
---------------------------
PETITIONER(S):-------------
1. PAULY,
KATTUMATH HOUSE,CHENGALURE VILLAGE
MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK,THRISSUR DISTRICT.
2. TONY,
KATTUMATH HOUSE,CHENGALURE VILLAGE
MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK,THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.P.DEEPAK
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR-680001.2. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,SECRETARIAT
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER(REVENUE), SRI.P.K.SOYUZ
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31-12-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
SU/-
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
APPENDIX
P1:RECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE AREA UNDER NUTMEG AND PLANTAIN CULTIVATION.
P2:COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD. 19-12-2012.
P3:COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF REVISION DTD. 28-12-2012.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL.
/TRUE COPY/
P.A. TO JUDGE
SU/-
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
---------------------------------------
W.P.(C). No. 31471 of 2012
---------------------------------------- Dated this the 31[st] day of December, 2012
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 are stated as aggrieved of Ext.P2 order passed by the 1[st] respondent, whereby the land in question hasbeen ordered to be restored to the original stature, invoking thepower and procedure under Section 13 of the KeralaConservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that theproceeding pursued and finalized by the 1[st] respondent is per sewrong and illegal in all respects. It is stated that the petitionersare having the property comprised in Survey Nos. 294 and 305 ofChengalure Village and proceedings pursued by the 1[st]respondent are of course with reference to said Sy.No. as well,apart from Survey No.306, which property is owned by one Mr.James. It is also discernible from Ext.P2 that, notice of hearingwas issued only to James, who owns the property in Sy.No.306and not to the petitioners who are the owners of the propertycomprised in Sy.Nos. 294 and 305 respectively, submits the W.P.C. No.31471 of 2012
learned counsel. It was accordingly, that Ext.P2 was came to bepassed without any notice to the petitioners.
3. This Writ Petition has been filed on many a ground in respect of the merits of the case as well. Non applicability of theprovisions of The Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and WetLand Act, 2008 to deal with the case in question, is also pointedout. The learned counsel submits that, being aggrieved ofExt.P2, the petitioners have already approached the 2[nd]respondent by filing Ext.P3 revision petition and the prayersought for in this writ petition is to cause Ext.P3 to be consideredand disposed of within a reasonable time.
4. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.
5. Considering the limited nature of relief sought for, thisCourt does not find it necessary to go into the merits of the case.The writ petition is disposed of, directing the 2[nd] respondent toconsider Ext.P3 revision petition and pass appropriate orders inaccordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to thepetitioners at the earliest, at any rate, within 'three months' fromthe date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Implementation of W.P.C. No.31471 of 2012
-3-
Ext.P3 shall be kept in abeyance till such time.
The petitioners shall produce a copy of this judgment alongwith a copy of the writ petition before the 2[nd] respondent forfurther steps.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.
Kp/-