Kerala High Court
Kunhi Muhammed vs Land Tribunal on 2 August, 2021
WP(C) NO. 15320 OF 2021 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
MONDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 11TH SRAVANA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 15320 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
KUNHI MUHAMMED,
AGED 60 YEARS,
S/O. MUHAMMED HAJI, MULLAPPALLY HOUSE,
VADAKKEKULAMBU, PONMALA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV U.K.DEVIDAS
RESPONDENT/S:
1 LAND TRIBUNAL,
(LAND REFORMS), CIVIL STATION, TIRUR, TIRUR P. O.,
MALPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 101.
2 SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, (LAND REFORMS),
LAND TRIBUNAL, CIVIL STATION, TIRUR, TIRUR P. O.,
MALPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 101.
SRI SYED M THANGAL, GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
02.08.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 15320 OF 2021 2
JUDGMENT
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
seeking the following reliefs:
i. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or
direction to the respondents to dispose the S.M.No.774/2021 as
evidenced by Ext.P1 within a reasonable time.
2. The petitioner states that he, along with other co-owners, are in
possession of property admeasuring 0.1336 Hectors in Block No.42 in Survey
No.196/3 of Ponmala Village, Malappuram District.
3. It appears from Ext.P1 certificate produced by the petitioner that
a suo moto proceeding has been initiated by the Land Tribunal, (Land
Reforms), Tirur, Malappuram under Rule 5 of the Kerala Land Reforms
(Vesting and Assignment) Rules, 1970, for assignment of the right, title and
interest of the landlord vested in the Government under Section 72 of the
Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 and for issuance of a certificate of purchase
under Section 72K of the said Act, read with Rule 14 of the said Rules and
the same is pending as S.M.No.774/2021. The petitioner is aggrieved by the
delay in conclusion of the proceedings and his solitary prayer is for directions
to the respondents to expedite the same.
4. I have heard Sri. U.K.Devidas, the learned counsel for the
petitioner and Smt. K.Amminikutty, the learned senior Government Pleader.
5. Sri. U.K.Devidas, the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner would rely on the judgment of this Court in Narayanan
Namboodiri v. The Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms) and another
[Judgment dated 14.03.2018 in W.P.(C) No.28398 of 2017 and connected
cases] and it is argued that similar directions be issued in this matter as
well.
6. The learned Government Pleader submits that the directions
issued by this Court in Narayanan Namboodiri (supra) can be followed.
7. I have considered the submissions advanced.
8. In Narayanan Namboodiri (supra), this Court took note of
the long pendency of matters before the Land Tribunals and it was felt that
it would not be proper for this Court to issue orders to take matters out of
turn of those cases wherein the petitioners were able to approach this
Court. This Court had also issued directions to the Government to take
measures to remove the stumbling blocks so that the proceedings could be
expedited. In tune with the directions issued by this Court, orders were
issued by the Government permitting the village officers to exercise powers
of Revenue Inspectors. Directions were issued to keep cases filed by senior
citizens in a special category with a view to expediting the same and the
petitioners in those matters were directed to cooperate with the Land
Tribunal in effecting service of notice to the Landlords. Paragraph No.2 of
the judgment is extracted below for convenience.
"2. On consideration of the facts and circumstances as above, this Court is of the
view that the following directions can be issued for expeditious disposal of
the cases by the Land Tribunal:
(i) If it is felt that there is delay in obtaining reports through the Revenue
Inspectors on account of their shortage, the Land Tribunal is free to
get the reports from the Village Officers concerned. It is the
discretion of the Land Tribunal in what manner such reports should
be obtained.
(ii) Utmost importance should be given for expeditious disposal of all the
cases filed by the senior citizens. The Land Tribunal shall dispose
such cases of senior citizens on seniority basis within six months.
(iii) In respect of all other cases, the Land Tribunal shall follow the
seniority of such cases and dispose the same within the maximum
outer limit of 18 months unless there is a stay passed by the higher
authorities. The Land Tribunal shall not break the seniority of such
cases except for any directions being issued by this Court or any
higher authority.
(iv) The parties are given liberty to take out notice to the land owners in
such a manner in which the Land Tribunal deems fit to do so,
including publications.
(v) In respect of the matters which are pending before the Deputy
Collector, he shall follow the same procedure as mentioned above.
(vi) In respect of the proceedings in which all the steps have been
completed which are ripe for passing orders as on today, the Land
Tribunal shall pass orders within two months and the directions
issued in earlier paragraphs would not affect those matters.
However, in all other cases, the directions shall be strictly followed.
(vii) The Government order, G.O.(P).No.09/2018/ RD, dated 22.02.2018
will form part of this Judgment. (underline supplied)"
9. Having considered the facts and circumstances and the
submissions made across the bar, I am of the considered opinion that the
directions issued by this Court in Narayanan Namboodiri (supra) can be
followed and necessary directions can be issued.
In the result, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the
respondents to dispose of S.M.No.774 of 2021, following the directions
issued by this Court in Narayanan Namboodiri (supra) and in accordance
with law.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
JUDGE
NS
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15320/2021
PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS :
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED
30.06.2021 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS : NIL
