Sulochana vs Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Fort Kochi, Ernakulam-682001, Tahasildar, Aluva Taluk, Aluva-683101 and Village Officer, Office of The Village Officer, Karukutty Village-683576

Justice T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.—In this writ petition, the main prayer is for a direction to the respondents to pass orders on the application for assignment of land. Ext.P1 is the application for assignment of 5.87 Ares of land in resurvey No. 259/4 of Karukutty village. The petitioner has stated in detail in paragraphs 1 to 5 of the writ petition the background of the litigation and the circumstances which led to her in filing this writ petition. The petitioner is residing in the property having an extent of 8.90 Ares in resurvey No. 259/2-2 of Block No. 2 of Karukutty village. The property having an extent of 5.87 Ares abutting her land is also in possession of the petitioner and it has been in the possession of her family for more than 40 years, it is claimed. It is submitted that the same is required for the protection and beneficial enjoyment of the petitioner''s property. Ext.P2 is a copy of the mahazar and the report submitted by the file:////altifileserver/formatnew/For% 20 convert/21.06.2012/1709-2012/KE120543.txt (4 of 7)6/21/2012 9:15:26 AM 3rd respondent pursuant to the submission of the application. The report concerns the requirement of assignment of the said land. The petitioner was informed by the 2nd respondent, as per Ext.P3 letter, that the petitioner will have to submit a consent letter for remitting the market price of the property. The petitioner thereafter submitted a consent letter expressing her willingness for remitting the market price of the property within the time prescribed in Ext.P3. The petitioner on enquiry further found that the 3rd respondent has not submitted a report showing the market price. Again the petitioner filed a representation before the 1st respondent as per Ext.P4 requesting the 1st respondent to issue necessary directions to the respondents 2 and 3 to issue Pattayam to the petitioner. Ext.P5 is another representation filed by the petitioner and again it is followed by Exts.P6 and P7 reminders.

In fact, the petitioner has also pointed out a mistake in the survey number. It is submitted that in the report, the survey number is mentioned as 289/4 by mistake whereas the correct survey number is 259/4. The said mistake is pointed out by the file:////altifileserver/formatnew/For%20convert/21.06.2012/1709-2012/KE120543.txt (5 of 7)6/21/2012 9:15:26 AM petitioner in Exts.P6 and P7.

If the report showing the market value of the property has not been furnished by the 3rd respondent so far, the 1st or 2nd respondent as the case may be will call for the report and thereafter will finalize the proceedings in accordance with the Rules. The same will be done within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition by the petitioner.

This writ petition is disposed of as above.