IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH DECEMBER 2011 / 23RD AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 1785 of 2011(W) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- KUNJU KRISHNAN NAIR, S/O.KESAVA PILLAI, KOMAL BHAVAN,KARODE VILLAGE, AYIRA P.O., NEYYATINKARA TALUK,TRIVANDRUM - 695502. BY ADV. SRI.T.C.MOHANDAS SRI.T.M.SUNIL SMT.S.CHITHRA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TRIVANDRUM-695001. 2. THASILDAR, NEYATTINKARA, TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT - 695121. 3. VILLAGE OFFICER, KARODE VILLAGE OFFICE, KARODE - 695121. ADDL. R4 & R5 4. SUPERINTENDENT OF RESURVEY, TRIVANDRUM 695 001 5. DIVAKARAN NAIR, S/O KRISHNA PILLAI, SUMA BHAVAN, AYIRA PO, NEYYATINKARA, TRIVANDRUM 695 502 (Impleaded vide order dated 16.3.11 in I.A.4132/11) ADV. SRI.RAM MOHAN.G. FOR ADDL.R5 SRI.G.P.SHINOD FOR ADDL.R5 GP SRI.MOHAMMED SHAH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 1785 of 2011 APPENDIX EXHIBIT EXT.P1- TRUE COPY OF PETITION DATED 15.11.10 SUBMITTED BEFORE R1 AND R2 /true copy/ P.A. To Judge ANTONY DOMINIC, J ....................................................... W.P.(C).1785/2011 .............................................. Dated this the 14th day of December, 2011 JUDGMENT According to the petitioner, by document No.2393/1978 of the SRO, Kulathoor, he purchased 25.5 cents of land situated in Sy.No.36/3A of Karode Village in Neyyattinkara Taluk. Petitioner submits that on completion of the re-survey, several mistakes have crept in the re-survey records. It is his case that insofar as his property is concerned, the name of the additional fifth respondent has been shown as the owner of the property. Coming to know of the same, he made Ext.P1 application to the respondents for rectification of the mistake. There was no response to the same and that led him to file this writ petition. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents and the learned counsel appearing for the fifth respondent. 3. As at present, the grievance of the petitioner will be redressed, if action is taken on Ext.P1. Since the matter is W.P.(C).1785/11 2 concerning the rectification of re-survey records, I feel it is the second respondent who is the appropriate authority to deal with Ext.P1. Therefore I direct the second respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P1 with notice to the petitioner and the fifth respondent. This the second respondent shall do as expeditiously as possible at any rate, within six weeks of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition. 4. Needless to say that it will be open to the parties to substantiate their contentions by producing documents before the second respondent. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs