Cont.Case (C) No.1597 of 2020 in W.P.(C) No.1938 of 2019

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS** **TUESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 26TH KARTHIKA, 1942** ## **Con.Case(C).No.1597 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 1938/2019** **AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 1938/2019(N) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA** ## **PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN WP(C):** **SHYNI AGED 41 YEARS D/O.RAGHAVAN, PARAMBHATH, PULIKAL P O, VADAKAA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 653707.** ## **BY ADV. SRI.PHILIP M.VARUGHESE** ## **RESPONDENTS/2,3 AND 5TH RESPONDENTS IN W.P.(C):** **1 PRASIL.K.K VADAKARA TALUK TAHASILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, AGED NOT KNOWN FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN VADAKARA MINI CIVIL STATION, COURT ROAD, VADAKARA - 673101. 2 VEERENDRA KUMAR SURVEY SUPERINTENDENT/DY DIRECTOR (SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS), AGED NOT KNOWN, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN K.T.GOALAN ROAD, CIVIL STATION, ERANHIPPALAM, KOZHIKODE, KERALA, PIN - 673020. 3 ANIL KUMAR P VILLAGE OFFICER, EDACHERI, EDACHERI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, AGED NOT KNOWN, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN EDACHERI TUNERI, KOZHIKODE, KERALA, PIN – 673505. BY ADV. SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, SR.GOVT.PLEADER** **THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **Con.Case(C).No.1597 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 1938/2019** **2** ## **ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.** ## **------------------------------------** ## **Cont.Case (C) No.1597 of 2020 in W.P.(C) No.1938 of 2019** **-----------------------------------Dated this the 17[th] day of November, 2020** ## **JUDGMENT** The above Contempt of Court Case has been filed alleging noncompliance of the directions issued by this Court in Annexrue A1 judgment dated 25.01.2019 in WP(C) No.1938 of 2019 filed by the petitioner herein. 2. Heard Sri.Philip M Varughese, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 3. The following directions and orders have been passed by this Court in paragraph No.6 Annexure A1 judgment in WP(C) No.1938 of 2019 which reads as follows: _“6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case, it is ordered that the 2nd respondent Tahsildar will take up the application submitted by the petitioner for survey, measurement and demarcation of the boundaries of the petitioner’s property and will ensure that the proper and effective survey and measure is got done by the 4th respondent Taluk Surveyor with due prior notice to the petitioner and any other affected neighbouring property owners. The Surveyor concerned should conduct survey, measurement and demarcation of the petitioner’s property on the_ **Con.Case(C).No.1597 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 1938/2019** **3** _basis of the prior title deeds of the petitioner, Ext.P5 title deed, old survey records, resurvey records and any other relevant piece of materials, which may be pointed out by the petitioner. The surveyor will furnish a comprehensive report on the outcome of the survey, measurement and demarcation of the boundaries of the petitioner’s property covered by Ext.P5 sale deed and should also annex therewith a survey sketch. A copy of the report of the surveyor along with the copy of the survey sketch should be given by the 2nd respondent Tahsildar in advance to the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner may submit her written submissions in the matter before the 2nd respondent, who will thereafter take steps to finalise the request made by the petitioner for survey, measurement and demarcation of the boundaries in accordance with law. The petitioner has made certain contentions based on the legal positions laid down by this Court in the decision as in Savithri Ammal Vilasini Ammal v. Jayaram Pillai, Padmavathy Amma reported in [1989 (2) KLT 709]. It is for the petitioner to urge all those aspects before the 2nd respondent Tahsildar, who will consider and advert to those aspects as well while finalizing the matter. It is also made clear that since the 5th respondent Village Officer has already taken a view in the matter, the 2nd respondent Tahsildar and the 4th respondent Taluk Surveyor should ensure that the incumbent in the post of the 5th respondent Village Officer, who had taken the impugned action as referred to hereinabove, shall not be associated with the decision making process to ensure due regard to fairness and impartiality in the decision making process. The entire process in this regard should be duly completed without much delay, preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment.”_ ## 4. When the case had come up for consideration on the previous occasion, this Court after recording the submissions of the respondents had passed an order on the day which reads as follows: “ _Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned senior Government Pleader would submit on the basis of instructions that it is reliably learned that the 1[st] respondent-Tahsildar as well as the Taluk Surveyor concerned have already completed the process of conducting survey and measurement and thereafter, it has been found that some mistakes crept in the earlier survey in respect of the subject property and hence, report has been given by the 1[st] respondent to the 2[nd] respondent-_ **Con.Case(C).No.1597 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 1938/2019** **4** _Survey Superintendent for rectification of such mistakes in terms of the provisions contained in the Kerala Survey and Boundary Rules and that some more time may be required for the 2[nd] respondent to finalize action in that regard._ _2. Thus, 3 weeks time is sought for on behalf of the 2[nd] respondent to file affidavit to report steps for such compliance. The 2[nd] respondent will immediately file an affidavit before this Court explaining as to when he had received the survey report and survey sketch said to have been finalized by the 1[st] respondent –Tahsildar and the Taluk Surveyor concerned and as to the reasons for the delay in compliance of the directions in Annexure-A1 judgment etc. The 2[nd] respondent is also directed to ensure that process of compliance is expedited, without any further delay.”_ 5. Today when the matter has been taken up for consideration Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Senior Government Pleader would submit that now a subsequent survey measurement has been effectuated by the 2[nd] respondent Survey Superintendent which has done on 03.11.2020 and 09.11.2020 with a due prior notice to the petitioner, wherein it has been disclosed that part of the property claimed and said to be possessed by the petitioner is government purampoke land and that the survey sketch and the survey report of the 2[nd] respondent Survey Superintendent has been already forwarded by him to the 1[st] respondent Tahsildar. Further it is submitted that now consequential proceedings will have been issued by 1[st] respondent Tahsildar in the light of the abovesaid survey and measurement, after affording opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. Sri.Philip M. **Con.Case(C).No.1597 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 1938/2019** **5** Varughese, learned counsel for the petitioner would complaint that though the second survey measurement by 2[nd] respondent Survey Superintendent has been done with due notice to the petitioner, he has not conducted the survey after examination of the title deeds of the petitioner and further that though copy of the 1[st] survey report of the Taluk Survey in respect of the survey conducted by him on 02.08.2019 has been given to the petitioner, a copy of the survey sketch prepared by Taluk Surveyor so preferred by the petitioner has not been given to the petitioner till date. Further that even now the petitioner has not been given both the survey report and survey sketch said to have been prepared by the 2[nd] respondent Survey Superintendent in pursuance of the subsequent surveys conducted by him on 03.11.2020 and 09.11.2020. 6. Accordingly it is ordered that the respondents 1 and 2 will ensure that copy of the survey sketch prepared by the Taluk Surveyor on the basis of the survey done 02.08.2019 as well as copies of the survey report and survey sketch prepared by the 2[nd] Survey Superintendent in pursuance of the subsequent survey conducted by him on 03.11.2020 and 09.11.2020 shall be immediately made available to the petitioner without any further delay, at any rate, within **Con.Case(C).No.1597 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 1938/2019** **6** one week. 7. Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Senior Government Pleader submits that as he is not aware about the WhatsApp number of the petitioner’s counsel, he has not been in a position to forward the copies of the survey sketch and survey report prepared by the 2[nd] respondent Survey Superintendent and that if the counsel for the petitioner immediately informs him about the email ID and WhatsApp number of counsel for the petitioner, then he (Senior Government Pleader) would immediately forward copies of the said survey report and survey sketch prepared by the 2[nd] respondent Survey Superintendent to the counsel for the petitioner in that mode. If the counsel for the petitioner is interested to receive copies of those documents from the learned Senior Government Pleader, then he may immediately inform his email ID and WhatsApp number to the Senior Government Pleader so that necessary action in that regard could be done by the officer. 8. After ensuring that the abovesaid documents are given to the petitioner as aforedirected, the 1[st] respondent Tahsildar will afford reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and pass proceedings in the matter and pass necessary proceedings then in the matter, so as to comply with the directions in Annexure A1 judgment **Con.Case(C).No.1597 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 1938/2019** **7** without any further delay, at any rate within three weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this judgment. The 2[nd] respondent officer will ensure that certified copies of the judgments are forwarded to all the three respondents immediately for necessary information and further action. 9. In case the petitioner has any legally justiciable grievances to the abovesaid decisions rendered by the respondent authorities concerned, then liberty is accorded to him to workout his remedies in the manner known to law. With these observations and directions, the above Contempt of Court Case (C) will stand disposed of. **Sd/ALEXANDER THOMAS JUDGE** SCS **Con.Case(C).No.1597 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 1938/2019** **8** ## **APPENDIX** ||**APPENDIX**| |---|---| |**PETITIONER'S/S**|**EXHIBITS:**| |**ANNEXURE A1**|**CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C)**| ||**NO. 1938/2019 DATED 25.01.2019.**| |**ANNEXURE A2**|**POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 25.10.2018**| |**ANNEXURE A3**|**TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY**| ||**THE TALUK SURVEYOR DATED 2.8.2019.**| |**ANNEXURE A4**|**REPLY LETTER BY DATED 6.11.2019.**| |**ANNEXURE A5**|**ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THE RECEIPT BY THE 3RD**| ||**RESPONDENT.**| |//TRUE COPY//|| |PA TO JUDGE||