IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 21ST JANUARY 2008 / 1ST MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 30425 of 2007(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ MITHRAN VASUDEVAN NAMBOODIRI NEDUMPURATH ILLOM, MITTAYIKUNNAMKARA,THALAYOLAPPARAMBU P.O. VADAYAR VILLAGE, VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 605. BY ADV. SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.SREEDHARAN NAIR SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM 2. THE DIRECTOR, SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS DIRECTORATE, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. DISTRICT SURVEY SUPERINTENDENT, COLLECTORATE,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 4. RESURVEY SUPERINTENDENT , VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 5. THE TALUK TAHSILDAR, VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DIST. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.R.SABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC30425/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE SURVEY PLAN PREPARED BY A COMPETENT RETIRED VILLAGE OFFICER, VAIKOM BY NAME K.SIVAN. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 26.7.2007 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 26.7.2007 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 26.7.2007 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 26.7.2007 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: COPY PF REPRESENTATION DATED 18.9.2007 SUB MITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.C43946/2007 DATED 11.9.2007 OF THE ADDL. TAHSILDAR, VAIKOM TO THE RESURVEY SUPERINTENDENT, VAIKOM. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VADAYAR, VAIKOM TALUK, EVIDENCING THAT THE PETITIONER HAD PAID PROPERTY TAX FOR THE YEAR 2006-2007 ON 11.1.2007. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.30425 of 2007 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner complains that during the course of the resurvey which was conducted, survey stones have been laid in his private property. On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader on instructions submitted that the survey stones were laid to demarcate the boundary between the road and the petitioners property. The contention of the petitioner is that there is no such road and it is purely a mistake that was committed during resurvey. According to the petitioner to get this mistake corrected, he has submitted Ext. P2 application before the respondents and such application still remains unattended. From the submissions made by both sides, it is clear that there exists a dispute on the situs of the survey stones. This mistake can be resolved only by the second respondent. 2. Therefore, I direct that the second respondent shall take into consideration Ext.P2 application made by the petitioner WPC 30425/2007 2 as expeditiously as possible at any rate, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Before any action is taking in Ext.P2, notice shall be given to the petitioner and other affected parties. The writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE csl