IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 26TH JULY 2011 / 4TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 20376 of 2011(V) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- JOSEPH MATHEW, AGED 56, S/O.LATE JOSEPH, KUNNAMKOTTU HOUSE, THADIYAMPAD P.O., VAZHATHOPPU, IDUKKI VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.VARGHESE C.KURIAKOSE SRI.ADEEP ANWAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY DEPT. OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM.695 001 2. THE TAHSILDAR, THODUPUZHA TALUK, TALUK OFFICE, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT.685 584 3. TALUK SURVEYOR, THODUPUZHA TALUK, TALUK OFFICE, THODUPUZHA.PIN-685 584 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, IDUKKI POLICE STATION,IDUKKI.PIN-685 602 R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.20376/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE LAND ASSIGNMENT PATTA BEARING NO.LA 125/78 OF THODUPUZHA TALUK ISSUED BY TAHSILDAR, THODUPUZHA. P2 COPY OF THE BASIC TAX PAID RECEIPT DATED 02/05/2011. P3 COPY OF THE SKETCH OF PROPERTY COVERED BY EXT.P1 WHILE PATTA OF PROPERTY COVERED BY EXT.P1 WHILE PATTA WAS PREPARED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P4 COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 27/04/2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P5 COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 04/07/2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P6 COPY OF THE APPLICATION UNDER RULE 27 DATED 11/07/2011 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P7 COPY OF THE APPLICATION UNDER RULE 43 DATED 11/07/2011 P8 COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 11/07/2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts ANTONY DOMINIC, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.20376 of 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T Inaction on Exts.P6 and P7 applications, is what is mainly complained of in this writ petition. 2. According to the petitioner, his property is having an extent of 1 acre and 3 cents and is comprised in Survey No.161/1 of Idukki Village. In respect of the said property Ext.P1 patta was also issued. 3. He made applications for survey and demarcation of the property. These applications were acknowledged by the 2nd respondent as per Exts.P4 and P5. No action was taken on the applications and therefore he again made Exts.P6 and P7 applications. In spite of all this, since no steps were taken on the applications, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing this writ petition with the following prayer: “Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus or other appropriate writ, directing the 2nd and 3rd respondents to forthwith conduct W.P(C) No.20376 of 2011 2 and conclude measurement of the property mentioned in Ext.P1 title deed and fix the boundaries which is requested under Exts.P6 and P7 or point out the boundaries based on such requests as contemplated under Rule 27 and Rule 43 of the Survey and Boundaries Rules and further direct them to seek assistance from the 4th respondents in the event of any law and order problem is contemplated or apprehended.” 4. If as stated by the petitioner he has made applications as above, there is no reason stated why steps should not been taken on such applications. 5. In the light of the complaint regarding the inaction on the part of the respondents, I direct that if the applications made by him have been received and are pending, the 2nd respondent shall take appropriate action in the matter. This the 2nd respondent shall do as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within six weeks from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition. The Writ Petition is disposed of. ANTONY DOMINIC ab JUDGE