IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 5TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 14TH BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 20326 of 2004(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- ABDULLA PARAMMAL NARANATH S/O. MOHAMMED, KARIPPOOR AMSOM, DESOM, PALLIKKAL VILLAGE, THIRURANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.MUJEEB RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. THE ASST.DIRECTOR OF SURVEY, MALAPPURAM. 2. THE RE-SURVEY SUPERINTENDENT, RE-SURVEY OFFICE, TIRUR. BY ADV. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SMITHA SUKUMARAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No.20326 of 2004 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 20.01.1997 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 29.04.2004 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. /TRUE COPY/ P.S. TO JUDGE. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C) No. 20326 OF 2004 ......................................................................... Dated this the 5th September , 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this Court seeking for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent to consider Ext. P1 petition and to conduct survey and demarcate the property owned and possessed by the petitioner in Re-survey No.78/6 and 7 of Pullikkal Village in Malappuram district. 2. When the matter came up for consideration on 25.10.2004, taking note of the submission made by the learned Government Pleader that Ext. P1 stated as preferred by the petitioner was not actually filed before the second respondent, a statement was directed to be filed . Pursuant to the said order, a detailed counter affidavit has been filed on 02.11.2004 by the second respondent, wherein the averments and allegations raised in the writ petition have been rebutted, further pointing out that the said complaint has not been received in the office of the second respondent. It is also stated that the petition dated 29.04.2004 stated as preferred by the petitioner was addressed W.P.(C) No. 20326 OF 2004 2 to the 'Assistant Surveyor' Malappuram, whereas no such officer or office of the cadre of 'Assistant Surveyor' is prevailing in the Department. However, pursuant to the petition dated 30.l04.2004, (styled as Adalat petition) it was considered in the office of the Superintendent (RS,) Tirur and the matter was got enquired into from the Re-survey Superintendent Office, Tirur. Based on the materials collected, it was found that there was no merit and accordingly the petition was rejected on the basis of the recommendation of the Head Surveyor of the Superintendent Office and the position was informed to the petitioner as per the proceedings dated 08.06.2004. The above specific averments in the counter affidavit have not been chosen to be rebutted by the petitioner by filing any reply affidavit. There is no representation for the petitioner as well. In the said circumstance, this Court does not find it as a fit case for any interference. The writ petition is dismissed accordingly. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, W.P.(C) No. 20326 OF 2004 3 JUDGE. lk