High Court Kerala High Court

Paulson vs The Revenue Divisional Officer on 26 August, 2009

Kerala High Court
Paulson vs The Revenue Divisional Officer on 26 August, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 17111 of 2009(H)


1. PAULSON, AGED 36 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, THOTTIPPAL VILLAGE

3. JOY MANNEMPETTA,

4. P.S. RAJESH, S/O.SREEDHARAN,

5. ASHA, W/O. RAJESH, POOTHERI HOUSE,

6. P.V. KARUNAKARAN, S/O. VELAPPAN,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.SAMSUDIN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI

 Dated :26/08/2009

 O R D E R
                       V.GIRI, J.
         ----------------------------------------
                W.P.(C).No.17111 of 2009
         ----------------------------------------
        Dated this the 26th day of August, 2009.


                      JUDGMENT

The petitioner claims right, title and

interest over an extent of 50 cents of paddy land,

which devolved on him on the death of his father,

who got assignment as per deed No.1102/92 of

Nellaya Registrar’s Office. According to him, his

predecessor was cultivating paddy in the land for

long years. Respondents 4 and 5 purchased an

adjacent land. It is alleged that they are doing

real estate business. They converted the paddy

land into dry land. This, the petitioner

apprehends, will affect his land. He has filed

Ext.p1 petition before the Revenue Divisional

Officer against respondents 4 and 5. The

petitioner also alleges that the attempt of

respondents 4 and 5 is to acquire the property of

the petitioner. He has moved the Civil Court and

W.P.(C).No.17111 of 2009

:: 2 ::

Ext.P2 order of injunction has been passed.

Thereafter, the 6th respondent, father of

respondents 4 and 5, filed a complaint before the

Village Officer, Thottipal, alleging that the

petitioner is illegally converting his paddy land.

Ext.P5 stop memo was issued by the Village

Officer. This has been challenged in this writ

petition.

2. A stop memo, if at all, can only be

issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer. Ext.P5

shall, therefore, treated as a show cause notice

and the same, along with the objections of the

petitioner shall be forwarded by the Village

Officer to the Revenue Divisional Officer within

two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of

this judgment. Thereupon, the petitioner and the

6th respondent shall be heard and final orders

shall be passed within one month by the Revenue

W.P.(C).No.17111 of 2009

:: 3 ::

Divisional Officer. The 1st respondent Revenue

Divisional Officer shall also look into Ext.P1 and

take appropriate action, after notice to the

affected parties, within two months from the date

of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

(V.GIRI)
JUDGE
sk/

//true copy//

P.S. to Judge