JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed challenging Exts.P10(a) and P10(b)

orders of the 1st respondent and seeking directions to the 1st respondent Panchayath to regularise the construction of existing structures in the property belonging to the petitioners.

2. It is submitted that the petitioners are the owners in possession of 1.1071 hectares of land in Re-survey No.420/2 and another extent of 0.20007 hectares of adjacent land in Re-survey No.420/4 in Noolppuzha Village, Sulthan Bathery Taluk, Wayanad District. It is submitted that the petitioners had started a poultry farm and had also submitted applications for regularisation of the construction made in the property. It is submitted that by Ext.P8 proceedings, in the possession certificate issued to the petitioners for the purpose of consideration of the application for regularisation, the Village Officer had noted that the pattayam had been issued in respect of the property for agricultural purpose. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the said endorsement in the possession certificate is a clear mistake and that the pattayam in respect of the land did not contain any such restriction. It is submitted that the petitioners had approached the respondents with applications for getting a copy of the pattayam and it was stated that the copy of the pattayam is not available. It is submitted that the right of the petitioners to have this application for regularisation of the construction, is also not been proceeded with due to wrong indication in Ext.P8.

3. The learned Government Pleader submits, on instructions, that the endorsement in Ext.P8 to the effect that the pattayam in respect of the property was granted only for agricultural purposes was a clerical mistake which occurred in the office of the 3rd respondent. However, it is submitted that the 3rd respondent is not competent to correct the mistake and in case the petitioners approach the Tahasildar, the relevant records will be verified and the mistake will be rectified without delay.

In the above view of the matter, there will be a direction that in case the petitioners approach the additional 4th respondent for a correction of Ext.P8 possession certificate by removing the endorsement made therein which is admittedly erroneously made in the office of the 3rd respondent, the same shall be considered and appropriate steps for correction of Ext.P8 shall be taken within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On receipt of the corrected possession certificate, the petitioners may approach the 2nd respondent with the same who shall consider the application for regularisation, in accordance with law. Appropriate action shall be taken by the 2nd respondent within a further period of three weeks from the date of production of the corrected possession certificate.

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE

SVP

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2070/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PCB CONSENT DT 25/11/2016.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT DT.05/03/2018 OF THE APPLICATION FOR NUMBERING.

Exhibit P3A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER DT. 15/06/2020.

Exhibit P3B TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE 2ND PETITION DT. 15/06/2020.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DT. 19/06/2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P5 NIL.

Exhibit P5A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DT. 26/05/2021. Exhibit P5B TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DT. 01/06/2021.

Exhibit P6 NIL.

Exhibit P6A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.RDOMDY/273/2021-F1 DT. 27/04/2021 ISSUED BY THE SUB COLLECTOR, MANANTHAVADY IN FAVOUR OF THE 1ST PETITIONER.

Exhibit P6B TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.RDOMDY/272/2021-F1 DT. 06/03/2021 ISSUED BY THE SUB COLLECTOR, MANANTHAVADY IN FAVOUR OF THE 2ND PETITIONER.

Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 12/08/2021 PASSED BY THE TAHSILDAR, SULTHAN BATHERY.

Exhibit P8 NIL.

Exhibit P8A TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED

01/09/2021.

Exhibit P8B TRUE COPY O