IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 31039 of 2010(D)
1. YOUSAF HAJI, S/O.AVARAN HAJI,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
... Respondent
2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
For Petitioner :SRI.BABU S. NAIR
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :11/10/2010
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````
W.P.(C) No. 31039 of 2010 D
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Dated this the 11th day of October, 2010
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P4, a stop memo
issued by the second respondent, preventing the petitioner
from reclaiming of the land mentioned therein.
2. According to the petitioner, way back in 1984,
petitioner had obtained Ext.P1 permission from the first
respondent in terms of the provisions under the Kerala Land
Utilisation Order, 1967. It is stated that, based on Ext.P1, the
land was already reclaimed and that the petitioner’s son has
constructed a house in the reclaimed land and is residing in
the land in question for the last several years. Photographs
produced by the petitioner, prima facie, support the aforesaid
plea. It is stated that he wanted to raise the level of a portion
of the land and for the said purpose, he filled his land with soil
removed from an area where a new road is under
construction, and that at that stage, Ext.P4 stop memo has
WPC.31039/10
: 2 :
been issued.
3. If the facts are as stated by the petitioner, he is
prima facie justified in contending that Ext.P4 should not have
been issued. However, in my view, on the receipt of Ext.P4, it
was open to the petitioner to explain the facts to the second
respondent and according to the counsel, a reply has already
been given.
4. If that be the situation, it is directed that the first
respondent will enquire into Ext.P4, duly adverting to the facts
disclosed by the petitioner in his reply and pass final orders in
the matter, with notice to the petitioner. This, the first
respondent shall do, at any rate, within four weeks from the
date of production of a copy of this judgment.
5. Petitioner to produce a copy of this judgment and
writ petition before the first respondent for compliance.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)
aks