High Court Kerala High Court

M.P.Unnikrishnan vs The Secretary To The Government Of on 9 September, 2010

Kerala High Court
M.P.Unnikrishnan vs The Secretary To The Government Of on 9 September, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 28037 of 2010(D)


1. M.P.UNNIKRISHNAN, AGED 41 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF
                       ...       Respondent

2. LAND TRIBUNAL, KUTTIPURAM,

3. REVENUE OFFICER (SPECIAL),

4. RAVINDRAN, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,

5. BALAGOPALAN, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,

6. SREEKUMARAN, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,

7. CHELLI, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,

8. VELAYUDHAN, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,

9. KALI, W/O.I.P.KOTHA, AGED ABOUT 51YEARS,

10. DEVAKI, W/O.P.P.PETER, AGED ABOUT

11. MUNDI, W/O.LATE VELLATTUPADI MADAMBI,

12. KORAN, S/O.LATE VELLATTUPADI MADAMBI,

13. AYYAPPAN, S/O.LATE VELLATTUPADI MADAMBI,

14. PARAMESWARAN,

15. KANNAKARAYI,

16. SUBRAHMANNINAN,

17. PARRYANNI, D/O.LATE VELLATTUPADI MADAMBI

18. YESODHA, W/O.LATE MADATHILPADI

19. M.P.SAJI,

20. M.P.SMITHA,

21. DEEPA.P.P., D/O.LATE BALAN,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.ABEY JOSEPH

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :09/09/2010

 O R D E R
                        ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                     ================
                 W.P.(C) NO. 28037 OF 2010 (D)
                 =====================

          Dated this the 9th day of September, 2010

                           J U D G M E N T

Petitioner seeks a direction for the consideration of Ext.P10,

a representation filed for an enquiry by the Vigilance and Anti

Corruption Bureau into the grant of a patta to the predecessors of

respondents 4 to 21. Facts show that the patta in question was

issued way back on 5/11/1979 in respect of 30 cents of land in RS

290/10 of Kattiparuthy village.

2. The challenge of the petitioner against the patta is on

the ground that the grant of the patta was irregular. However,

fact remains that despite the lapse of more than 30 years,

petitioner or anybody else have not taken recourse to the legal

remedies that were available against the grant of patta. At this

stage, the issue raised is highly belated and for that reason, I am

not persuaded to direct consideration of the representation.

Writ petition fails and is dismissed.

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp