JUDGMENT

The petitioner says that though he is the absolute owner in possession of the property involved in this case – which is evident from Ext.P1 Sale Deed in his favour and Ext.P2 tax receipt showing remittance of land tax in the past – he has been refused permission to pay tax and his request for issuance of a certificate of 'Thandapper' has also been denied without any cogent reason, by the 2nd respondent.

2. The petitioner says that he, therefore, preferred Ext.P3 request before the 2nd respondent, along with an application for copy of the 'Thandapper' account, which is evident from Ext.P4, but alleges that no action has been taken thereon until now. He, therefore, prays that both Ext.P3 and the application preferred by him for the 'Thandapper' account, be directed to be taken up and allowed by the

2nd respondent without any further delay.

3. The afore submissions of Sri.K.R.Vinod – learned counsel for the petitioner, were answered by Smt.Mable.C.Kurian – learned Senior Government Pleader, saying that Ext.P3 has not been yet received by the 2nd respondent and that, in any event of the matter, the request therein cannot be acceded to because the enquiry shows that there is change in the extent of the property, as claimed by the petitioner, in the Re-survey records. She, added that, therefore, the petitioner may be directed to take appropriate steps with respect to the Re-survey Records, rather than seeking reliefs in this writ petition.

4. In reply, Sri.K.R.Vinod – learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the change in the extent of Re-survey, as stated by the learned Senior Government Pleader, is untenable and that his client will be able to convince the 2nd respondent appropriately, if given a chance.

5. When I evaluate the afore submissions, it is evident that when the petitioner says that he has approached the 2nd respondent – through Ext.P3, as also an application for the 'Thandapper' account – the said respondent is obligated to consider the same on its merits and to issue appropriate orders so that he will then obtain necessary recourse in law, if so required.

6. The reasons now stated by the learned Senior Government Pleader are not on record, but are based on oral instructions received by her.

In the afore circumstances, I order this writ petition and leave liberty to the petitioner to approach the 2nd respondent with a copy of Ext.P3; and if this is done within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, said Authority will hear him and consider the same, as also the application for the 'Thandapper' account – which is evident from Ext.P4, after affording him an opportunity of being heard; thus culminating in an appropriate order and necessary action thereon, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than one month thereafter.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE

SAS/27/01/2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 848/2022 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 THE COPY OF CERTIFIED COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.1712/1968 DATED 9.10.1968 OF SRO, CHERPU.

Exhibit P2 THE COPY OF LAND TAX RECEIPT ISSUED BY EDAKUNNI VILLAGE OFFICE DATED 5.4.2016.

Exhibit P3 THE COPY OF THE REQUEST LETTER DATED

6.8.2019.

Exhibit P4 COPY OF FEE PAYMENT RECEIPT FOR ISSUANCE OF COPY OF THE THANDAPPER DATED 3.11.2021.