High CourtsSingle Bench(2022) 02 KL CK 0156

Kusumakumari vs Special Tahsildar (LT), Office Of The Special Tahsildar (Lt), Palakkad, Palakkad 678 001

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 17 February 2022

HON’BLE JUDGES
Devan Ramachandran, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (C) No. 5325 Of 2022

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

17 paragraphs · 324 words

Devan Ramachandran, J

1.

The petitioner, who is stated to be a senior citizen of over 62 years in age, has approached this Court alleging that, even though a suo motu

proceedings has been initiated against her by the respondent Special Tahsildar (L.T) and numbered as S.M.No.720/2017, further action thereon has

not been completed until now. She, therefore, prays that the respondent be directed to do so and issue appropriate final orders thereon, within a time

frame to be fixed by this Court.

2.

In response, the learned Senior Government Pleaderâ€" Smt.K.Amminikutty, submitted that, if the suo motu proceedings are still

pending against the petitioner, the same can be disposed of by the respondent, within a period of six months, taking note of the fact that she is a senior

citizen. She, therefore, prayed that this writ petition be ordered only on such terms.

3.

When I consider the afore submissions, it is ineluctable that if S.M.No.720/2017 is still pending against the petitioner, then it will require to be

disposed of by the respondent within a period of six months, because this is the time frame that has been constantly followed by this Court in the case

of senior citizens.

Resultantly, this writ petition is ordered, directing the respondent to complete proceedings in S.M.No.720/2017 after following due procedure and after

affording necessary opportunity of being heard to the petitioner - as also to any other interested/affected persons â€" thus, culminating in an apposite

order thereon, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

Though there is no specific averment regarding the involvement of any Devaswom Board in the S.M.Proceedings, it is made clear that if the

competent Authority is to find so, then the said entity will also be given an opportunity of being heard while the afore directed exercise is completed.

This writ petition is thus disposed of.