Kerala High Court
Kamalakshi vs Deputy Collector(L.R.G7) on 11 August, 2021
WP(C) NO. 16303 OF 2021 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 20TH SRAVANA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 16303 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
KAMALAKSHI
AGED 56 YEARS
W/O UNNIKRISHNAN MANI, MULLAYAMPARAMBIL,
GANDHISEVA SADAN.P.O,
LAKKIDI PERUR-II VILLAGE,
PALAKKAD.
BY ADV V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL)
RESPONDENT/S:
DEPUTY COLLECTOR(L.R.G7)
LAND TRIBUNAL,
COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, PALAKKAD-678001.
SMT K AMMINIKUTTY, SR GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.08.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 16303 OF 2021 2
JUDGMENT
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
seeking the following reliefs:
(a) issue a writ of mandamus or any other order or direction and
direct the respondent to pass appropriate orders in S.M.No.102/2021
on the file of the Deputy Collector (L.R.), Palakkad within a time limit
as deems fit by this Hon'ble Court.
2. The petitioner states that she is in possession of property measuring
0.0700 Ha. comprised in Re-Sy.No.480/5 in Block No.89 of Lakkidi - Perur -II
Village. A suo motu proceeding has been initiated by the respondent 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.102/2021. The
petitioner is aggrieved by the delay in conclusion of the proceedings and her
solitary prayer is for directions to the respondents to expedite the same.
3. I have heard Sri.Johnson Varikkappillil, the learned counsel for the
petitioner and Smt. K.Amminikutty, the learned Senior Government Pleader.
4. Sri. Johnson Varikkapillil, 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.
5. The learned Government Pleader submits that the directions issued
by this Court in Narayanan Namboodiri (supra) can be followed.
6. I have considered the submissions advanced.
7. 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)"
8. 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 Deputy
Collector (L.R.G7), Palakkad to dispose of S.M.No.102 of 2021, following the
directions issued by this Court in Narayanan Namboodiri (supra) and in
accordance with law.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
JUDGE
sru
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16303/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY F THE RECEIPT OF SM.NO.102/2021
ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 19.02.2021.
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL
