IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 5TH JULY 2011 / 14TH ASHADHA 1933 Con.Case(C).No. 662 of 2011(S) ---------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT/ORDER IN WPC.6937/2010 DATED 04/03/2010 .................... PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- K.P. HAMZA, S/O. ABDUL KHADER, AGED 52 YEARS, KUNNAPPULLY HOUSE, LAKKIDI, OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.T.D.RAJALAKSHMI, SRI.R.SREEHARI. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- SHRI. S. SUNIL KUMAR, (FATHER'S NAME & AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), SUPERINTENDENT OF SURVEY (RESURVEY), OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF RE-SURVEY, SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS, OPPOSITE TOWN RAILWAY STATION, PALAKKAD-678 001. BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.V. VIJULAL. THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs Con.Case(C).No. 662 of 2011(S) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE A1: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO. 6937/2010 DATED 04/03/2010. ANNEXURE A2: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 09/07/2010 OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF RESURVEY, PALAKKAD. RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Contempt of Court Case No.662/2011-S ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 5th day of July, 2011 J U D G M E N T By Annexure-A1 Judgment, this Court directed the first respondent to take appropriate decision with regard to the petition Ext.P2 submitted by the petitioner before the said respondent to conduct survey in respect of his property including the property governed by Ext.P2 by the petitioner to effect mutation. 2. Learned Government Pleader on getting instructions submitted that presently, in the light of the Circular (MS) No.200/10/Revenue(E) Dept., dated 31/05/2010, respective Taluk Offices are given power to consider the complaints regarding such matters, especially, resurvey matters and by the same order the office of the re-survey Superintendent has been abolished. 3. Therefore, it is pointed out that the application of the petitioner has been transferred to the Taluk Office, Ottappalam for further action on C.O.C.No.662/2011 -:2:- 08/07/2010 and the petitioner has been informed about the same by letter dated 15/07/2010. 4. In the light of the above, the petitioner will have to approach the second respondent in the writ petition, namely, the Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Ottappalam who will consider the matter and take appropriate decision in the light of the directions issued in the Judgment in the writ petition. The petitioner will produce a copy of this Judgment along with Annexure-A1 Judgment and the writ petition before the Tahsildar, Ottappalam for compliance, who will take appropriate action expeditiously. Sd/- (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms