ASHOKAN S/O AMBUJAKSHAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner claims to be in absolute ownership, possession and enjoyment of property covered by Ext.P1 sale deed having an extent of 03.55 ares and 03.00 ares in Re.Sy.No.258/6 and 258/19, Vanchiyoor Village, Thiruvananthapuram Taluk, Thiruvananthapuram District.The petitioner has already sold the above said property covered by Ext.P1 as per Ext.P2 sale deed dated 5.2.2018 in favour of the 6th respondent. The petitioner was paying basic land tax in respect of the above said property covered by Ext.P1 as evident from Ext.P3 tax receipt.

(2.) The owner of the property prior to Ext.P1 transaction as well as the petitioner were paying the basic land tax in respect of the said property during the relevant period as discernible from Exts.P3 and P4 tax receipts. After sale of the property by the petitioner in favour of the 6th respondent as per Ext.P2, the 6th respondent approached the 5th respondent Village Officer, Vanchiyoor, Thiruvannathapuram for 6th mutation of the property. Thereupon the respondent was informed that in view of proceedings No.J1-77844/2015 dated 23.10.2017 issued by the 2nd respondent District Collector, Thiruvananthapuram, the property is shown as Government Tharisu land, which is evident from Ext.P5 communication dated 19.2.2018 issued by the 5th respondent Village Officer. Thereupon the 6th respondent has intimated the petitioner regarding Ext.P5 and has further informed that the 6th respondent will be constrained to take appropriate legal action against the petitioner. Thereupon the petitioner has approached the 2nd respondent District Collector, Thiruvananthapuram by submitting Ext.P6 representation dated 22.5.2018 as evident from Ext.P6(a) receipt, pointing out that the said property covered by Ext.P1 was the absolute private property of the 6th petitioner which was duly conveyed to the respondent as per Ext.P2 sale deed and that the objection that it is Government Tharisu land is factually and legally untenable and that necessary steps may be taken by the 2 nd respondent District Collector so as to issue directions to the 5th respondent Village Officer to mutate the said property covered by Ext.P2 sale deed in favour of the 6th respondent. That no effective action has been forthcoming despite the submission of Ext.P6 representation as early as on 22.5.2018. It is in the light of these factual averments that the petitioner has filed this writ petition with the following prayers:

(3.) Heard Smt.N.P.Asha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.A.C.Vidya, learned Government Pleader appearing for official respondents 1 to 5. In the nature of the orders proposed to be passed in this petition, notice to contesting respondent No.6 will stand dispensed with.