IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 20TH AUGUST 2009 / 29TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 19089 of 2009(E) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ M.C.SANTHA, W/O.LATE, KRISHNANKUTTY, AGED 53 YEARS, SREE SANTHI, ANGAMALY SOUTH,. BY ADV. MR.M.S.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, MANNARGHAT. 2. RE-SURVEY SUPERINTENDENT, OTTAPPALAM,. 3. HEAD SURVEYOR, O/O.THE RE-SURVEY SUPERINTENDENT, OTTAPALAM,. R1 TO R3 BY SPL.GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. HANILKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/08/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss V. GIRI, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P.(C) No. 19089 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 20th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner claims title over 7.50 acres of land in old Sy.No.1841 in Kallamala Village. According to her, her predecessors obtained jenmam right, as evidenced by OA 1432/1970. When the forest officials earlier allegedly prevented the petitioner from carrying on agricultural operations, on the premise that, as per the re-survey records certain forest lands which are included in the same survey relating to the petitioner’s property, the petitioner had approached this Court in W.P.(C) No. 284040 of 2008, which was disposed of by this Court, as per Ext.P1 judgment. Operative portion of Ext.P1 judgment reads as follows:- “5. In view of the above, I direct the 4th respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P6. This shall be done in the next adalath when similar such requests are also scheduled to be considered. 6. In so far as the claim of the petitioner for carrying out agricultural operations including removal of timber is concerned, the stand of the respondents as disclosed in the statement is that the petitioner has not made any application seeking permission for removal of the timber. This is a W.P.(C) No. 19089/09 2 statutory requirement and therefore, necessarily, it is for the petitioner to make such application to the appropriate authorities. Therefore, it is directed that depending upon the order to be passed on Ext.P6, it will be open to the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority seeking permission for removal of the timber, in which appropriate orders shall be passed.” 2. The petitioner then submitted an application before the 2nd respondent for no objection certificate for correcting the re-survey number of the petitioner’s property. By Ext.P4 the petitioner was informed by the 1st respondent Divisional Forest Officer that the High Court had by Ext.P4 judgment directed the Re-Survey Superintendent to consider the petitioner’s application and therefore, the application for no objection certificate shall be considered only after Re-Survey Superintendent takes a decision in terms of Ext.P4 judgment. Hence, the writ petition is filed praying for the following reliefs:- “i) to issue a writ of certiorari calling for the papers leading to Ext.P4 and quash the same. ii) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction, directing the 1st respondent issue NOC with regard to petitioner’s property to correct the Re-survey number of the property. iii) to issue such other reliefs, required under the circumstances of this case.” 3. A statement has been filed by the Forest Range Officer. W.P.(C) No. 19089/09 3 Paragraph 6 of the statement reads as follows:- “ 6. It is submitted that the O.A. schedule property has to be measured and demarcated either by survey department or by the Forest Mini Survey. It is submitted that this respondent has no objection in surveying the land by the Taluk Surveyor or Survey Superintendent with prior information to the Forest Department. If the property is surveyed and demarcated, this respondent will consider the application of the petitioner for issuing No Objection Certificate. This respondent cannot be issued the No Objection Certificate without survey and demarcation.” 4. In the light of the stand taken by the respondents that they will consider the application after survey of the land by the Taluk Surveyor or Survey Superintendent with prior information to the Forest Department, there will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to see that the petitioner’s property is surveyed and demarcated within two months form the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. Thereupon a sketch which is issued by the Survey Superintendent shall be produced before the 1st respondent who shall take action in the matter of issuance of no objection certificate. The writ petition is disposed of as above. V.GIRI, JUDGE. mn.