IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 12TH MARCH 2010 / 21ST PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 22 of 2008(C) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- NUSAIFA, W/O. P.I. SAYED MOHAMMED, PULIMOOTTIL HOUSE, MOOLAVATTAM, KOTTAYAM-686 026, REPRESENTED BY HER POWER OF ATTORNEY P.I. SAYED MOHAMMED, AGED 64 YEARS, S/O.IBRAHIM RAWTHER, PULIMOOTTIL HOUSE, MOOLAVATTAM, KOTTAYAM-686 026. BY ADV. MR.T.M.ABDUL LATHEEF RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS (RESURVEY), KOTTAYAM. 3. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KOTTAYAM. 4. VILLAGE OFFICER, KANJIRAPPALLY. 5. JASSIYA JALAL, PULIMOOTTIL HOUSE, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM DIST. 6. ZEENATH, W/O. V.S. ISMAIL, VALIYAKUNNATHU HOUSE, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM DIST. 7. V.M.A. RASHEED, S/O. V.S.ISMAIL, VALIYAKUNNATHU HOUSE, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM DIST. 8. V.M. SAFAR, S/O. V.S. ISMAIL, VALIYAKUNNATHU HOUSE, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM DIST. 9. RAHIMA AFTHAB, D/O.V.S. ISMAIL, VALIYAKUNNATHU HOUSE, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM DIST. WP(C).No. 22 of 2008(C) 10. KURSHI RAFI, D/O.V.S. ISMAIL, PARAKKAVETTY HOUSE, CHANGANACHERRY. 11. IBRAHIM JALAL, S/O. IBRAHIM RAWTHER, PULIMOOTTIL HOUSE, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM DIST. 12. ANTANY MATHEW, S/O. MATHEW, KALLARAKAL HOUSE, THAMBALAKKADUM, KANJIRAPPALLY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.K. RAMESH. R5 & R11 BY ADV. MR.K.GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP. R8 BY ADV. MR.V.S.AFSAL KHAN. R10 BY ADV. MR.A.A.MOHAMMED NAZIR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/03/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 22/2008-C APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.883 OF 1964 DATED 18/03/1964. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 16/01/1989 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 16/01/1989 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.M.4122/02/K.DIS. DATED 18/10/2006 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE REVISION DATED 24/09/2007 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.58/07 DATED 23/02/2007 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 01/10/2009. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE NOTICE OF REVISION DATED 10/04/2008 FILED IBRAHIM JALAL. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs. T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 22 of 2008-C - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 12th day of March, 2010. JUDGMENT The petitioner herein is mainly aggrieved by Ext.P4 order passed by the third respondent, whereby the mutation in respect of File Nos.PV 4/99 and 128/98 was cancelled. Against the same, the petitioner has filed a revision before the first respondent as Ext.P5. 2. Shortly stated, the facts show that the petitioner's father late Ismail was having 1 acre and 49 cents of property equivalent to 56.84 ares in Sy. Nos.130/7, 128/1, 130/2, 130/1A and 130/8 of Kanjirappally village. Various transactions were effected by him and the petitioner was given 8.99 cents of property, out of the total extent of 1 acre 49 cents, by virtue of Ext.P1 document. It is stated that she was in enjoyment of the said property. Even though the extent shown is 8.99 cents, some more excess lands were in her possession and accordingly she was in possession of 4.98 ares of land instead of 3.64 ares corresponding to 8.99 cents. 3. When the resurvey was conducted in 1975, in the account of late Mohammed Ismail an extent of 50.90 ares of property was there, corresponding to 136.068 cents, but he was actually in possession of wpc 22/08 2 132.076 cents. It is also the case of the petitioner that at the time of death of his father, he was having about 15 cents of land in his possession. 4. The matter reached the 4th respondent on the basis of a complaint filed by one Shri Ismail, Valiyakunnath, Kanjirappally. According to the petitioner, she was not heard in the matter. 5. Ext.P8 is a notice issued by the District Collector, Kottayam in respect of a revision petition filed by one Shri Ibrahim Jalal, who is the 11th respondent herein. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the above revision petition and the revision petition filed by the petitioner herein as Ext.P5, can be directed to be disposed of after hearing all the parties, within a time frame, for resolution of the dispute between the parties. 6. There will be a direction to the District Collector, Kottayam before whom the revision petitions have been filed as Ext.P5 by the petitioner and the revision petition mentioned in Ext.P8 filed by the 11th respondent are pending (E 17951/08), to dispose of both the revision petitions after hearing the parties concerned, within a period of two months from the date of wpc 22/08 3 receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/