IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 5TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 14TH KARTHIKA 1931 RP.No. 1081 of 2009(R) ------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.17794/2008 Dated 17/07/2009 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): 4TH RESPONDENT ------------------------------------------------------------- MULLIKULANGARA DEVI KSHETHRA BHARANA SAMITHI, MAVELIKKARA REP.BY ITS PRESIDENT SRI.K.RAMAKRISHNA UNNITHAN, ANIL BHAVANAM, PALLARIMANGALAM,THEKKEKARA. BY ADV. MR.RASHEED C.NOORANAD RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER ------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, ALAPPUZHA. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, CHENGANNUR. 3. THE TAHSILDAR,TALUK OFFICE, MAVELIKKARA. 4. THE DEPUPTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CHENGANNUR. 5. C.K.RADHAKRISHNAN PANICKER, CHAKKALAVADAKKATHIL,PONAKAM MURI,THEKKEKARA VILLAGE,MAVELIKKARA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.DILIP MOHAN ADV. MR. P. B. SAHASRANAMAM THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J ............................................... R.P.No. 1081 of 2009 ................................................. Dated this the 5th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner in the review petition is the 4th respondent in the writ petition. They are seeking review of my judgment dated 17.7.2009 in the writ petition, in which I have directed as follows: “Respondents 1 to 3 shall make arrangements to measure the property with notice to the petitioner as well as the 4th respondent. If on such measurement, it is found that the 4th respondent has encroached into the road poramboke, as agreed by the 4th respondent, they shall demolish the structure constructed by them in the road poramboke and give vacant possession of the same to respondents 1 to 3 without any objection whatsoever. If any other person is likely to be affected by the measurement, he/she shall also be given notice. The above exercise shall be taken up and completed as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.” Petitioner's grievance now is that the measurement has to be conducted on the basis of the settlement register, whereas the respondents 1 to 3 in the writ petition has measured the property based on the re-survey records, which is wrong. I am of opinion that the petitioner cannot dictate as to how the Government land has to be measured. The authentic records for the purpose of land in the State of Kerala is the re-survey records. That being so, the petitioner cannot insist on measuring R.P.No. 1081 of 2009 -2- the property on the basis of the settlement register, whereas the revenue authorities go by resurvey records. Therefore, I do not find any merit in the review petition and accordingly, the same is dismissed. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs