IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 19TH DECEMBER 2011 / 28TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 32498 of 2011(J) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.S.ABDUL LATHEEF,S/O.LATE SYED MUHAMMED RAWTHER,THEKKUMTHOTTATHIL HOUSE,ERUMELY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.T.I.ABDUL SALAM SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. SUPERINTENDENT OF RESURVEY,KOTTAYAM, PIN-686001. 2. VILLAGE OFFICER,ERUMELI SOUTH.P.O, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-666509. R3 BY GOVT.PLEADER M.J. RAJASREE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 32498 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS EXT-P1: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PARTITION DEED NO.2177 DATED 11.11.1971 OF THE VENNIKKULAM SUB REGISTRY EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONERS AND OTHERS EXT-P2: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.3421/1977 DATED 14.11.1997 OF THE PONKUNNAM SUB REGISTRY EXECUTED BY ABDUL JABBAR INFAVOUR OF ALIKUTTY. EXT-P3: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.919/1978 DATED 08.03.1978 OF THE PONKUNNAM SUB REGISTRY EXECUTED BY AHDUL JABBAR INFAVOUR OF ALIKUTTY. EXT-P4: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.654/1989 DATED 29/3/1989 OF THE PONKUNNAM SUB REGISTRY EXECUTED BY ALIKUTTY INFAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER HIS BROTHERS. EXT-P5: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.655/1989 DATED 30.03.1989 OF THE PONKUNNAM SUB REGISTRY EXECUTED BY ALIKUTTY INFAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER HIS BROTHERS. EXT-P6: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 11.12.2008 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL \\ TRUE COPY\\ PA TO JUDGE JM ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 32498 of 2011 J ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 19th day of December, 2011 J U D G M E N T ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ In this writ petition, what is complained of by the petitioner is the alleged delay on the part of the second respondent in considering Ext.P6, an application made by him for rectification of the re-survey records. 2. However, learned Government Pleader submits that the authority competent to deal with Ext.P6 is the Additional Tahsildar and not the second respondent. Therefore, Ext.P6 cannot be ordered to be dealt with and taking note of the submission made by the learned Government Pleader, I dispose of this writ petition, leaving it open to the petitioner to apply to the Additional Tahsildar concerned, seeking rectification of the alleged mistake in the re-survey records. It is directed that, if such an application is made, the same will be dealt with in accordance with law. Sd/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks/19/12