IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND SEPTEMBER 2010 / 31ST BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 27972 of 2010(V) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- 1. SHEELA PAUL,W/O.LATE K.P.PAULOSE, KILUTHATTILL HOUSE,THENGOD.P.O,KAKKANAD, KOCHI-682 030. 2. DR.ASHOK MATHEWS,REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER,AGITH GEORGE, S/O.LATE K.P.PAULOSE,KILUTHATTILL HOUSE, THENGOD.P.O,KAKKANAD,KOCHI-682 030. 3. AGITH GEORGE,S/O.LATE K.P.PAULOSE, KILUTHATTILL HOUSE,THENGOD.P.O,KAKKANAD,KOCHI-682 030. 4. ANOOP JAMES,S/O.LATE K.P.PAULOSE, KILUTHATTILL HOUSE,THENGOD.P.O, KAKKANAD,KOCHI-682 030. BY ADV. SRI.K.REGHU KOTTAPPURAM RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE SECRETARY TO GOVT.,REVENUE DEPARTMENT,GOVT.OF KERALA,SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695 001. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,KAKKANAD,ERNAKULAM,PIN-682 020. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, (R.D.O.),FORT KOCHI,ERNAKULAM,PIN-682 006. 4. THE TAHSILDAR,KANAYANNOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM,PIN-682 011. 5. THE SUB REGISTRAR,OFFICE OF SUB REGISTRAR,THRIKKAKARA,DIST.ERNAKULAM,PIN-682 021. R1 TO R5 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 27972 of 2010 V ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 22nd day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner claims to be the owner of property in R.S.No.13 in Block No.7 of Kakkanad village. According to the petitioner, in Ext.P8, fair value notification, the property has been shown as government property with Re.1 as its fair value. Though he filed Ext.P9 series appeals seeking correction of Ext.P8, that did not result in success. It is in these circumstances, this writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the second respondent to correct Ext.P8, to the extent it requires the petitioner's property as government property. 2. Along with IA.No.13003/2010, petitioner has produced Ext.P12 report of the Village Officer, Kakkanad to the Revenue Divisional Officer, indicating that the property in question is not government property and is one covered by WPC.27972/10 : 2 : title deeds of private parties. It is also recommended that fair value of the property shall be Rs.6,30,000/- per Are. 3. Prima facie, therefore, Ext.P12 shows that the description and value of the property belonging to the petitioner contained in Ext.P8 is erroneous. Necessarily, therefore, the Revenue Divisional Officer has to pass fresh orders in the matter, duly adverting to Ext.P12 report of the Village Officer. 4. Having regard to the case of the petitioner, because of the said mistake in Ext.P8, he is not in a position to alienate the property for which arrangements have already been made, it is directed that the Revenue Divisional Officer shall pass orders on Ext.P9 appeals filed by the petitioner in the light of Ext.P12 report of the Village Officer. This, the RDO shall do, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three weeks from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. 5. Once orders are passed, it will be open to the WPC.27972/10 : 3 : petitioner to present the sale deeds before the fifth respondent who shall thereupon register documents on that basis. 6. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition before respondents 3 and 5 for compliance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks