IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 5005 of 2010(A) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- SASINDRA RAJ.K., S/O.BABY ALIAS SARASWATHI, KALASANKANDI HOUSE, CHEMMANCHERY VILLAGE, KOYHILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.MANJERI SUNDERRAJ SMT.K.K.PREETHA RESPONDENT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, PUBLIC OFFICES BUILDING MUSEUM, TRIVANDRUM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. MR. BIJOY CHNADRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C) No. 5005 OF 2010 ......................................................................... Dated this the 24th February , 2010 J U D G M E N T Being aggrieved of the order passed by the District Collector, Kozhikode dismissing the appeal preferred under Section 53 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, the aggrieved party had already filed a Revision Petition before the respondent which is stated as pending. But the original revision petitioner took her last breath on 09.12.2009, whereby the rights and interests of the said revision petitioner devolved upon the petitioner and others whose names have been mentioned in Ext.P1 certificate issued by the concerned Village Officer. Based on the said certificate, the legal heirs filed Ext. P2 application for bringing them in the party array as additional revision petitioners 2 to 5 and the said proceeding is also pending. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved of the action of the respondent demanding production of legal heirship certificate W.P.(C) No. 5005 OF 2010 2 from the Tahsildar, Kozhikode to consider the Interlocutory Application, for impleading the petitioners therein in the party array and to have the Revision Petition considered on merits accordingly. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 4. For deciding the limited extent of the issue involved, this Court does not find it necessary to adjudicate upon the necessity to produce 'legal heirship certificate' from the Tahsildar or as to the necessity to produce any 'succession certificate' from the concerned Civil Court in the instant case. 5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits, based on the averments in the Writ Petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof, that the persons mentioned in Ext.P1 are the sole legal heirs of the deceased Baby @ Saraswathy, who was the original revision petitioner before the respondent and that the petitioners in Ext.P2 I.A. would like to continue the proceedings as the additional petitioners in the party array at their risk and cost. 6. In the above circumstances, the Writ Petition is W.P.(C) No. 5005 OF 2010 3 disposed of, directing the respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2 enabling the petitioners therein to continue the proceedings in the Revision Petition filed under Section 83(1) of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, also on the basis of Ext.P3 letter of authorization stated as given by the other petitioners in favour of the writ petitioner. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk