Gomathi vs The Special Tahasildar(Lr)
2021 Latest Caselaw 16594 Ker

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 16594 Ker
Judgement Date : 11 August, 2021

Kerala High Court

Gomathi vs The Special Tahasildar(Lr) on 11 August, 2021

WP(C) NO. 16265 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. 16265 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:

          GOMATHI,
          AGED 58 YEARS,
          W/O. PICHUMANI, WEST LOKANATHAN STREET,
          K.K.NAGAR, CHENNAI.

          BY ADVS.
          RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY
          K.VIJINA
          ARUL MURALIDHARAN



RESPONDENT/S:

          THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR(LR)
          PALAKKAD, OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LR)
          PALAKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 001




          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. 16265 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 Writ in the like nature direction or order commanding the Respondent to conduct expeditious enquiry and dispose proceedings numbered as S.M.No.954/2020 on the files of the respondent within a time limit that may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

2. The petitioner states that she is in possession of property

admeasuring 0.2350 Ha. comprised in Re.Sy.No.427/2 in Re-survey Block No.47

(Old Sy.No.110/4C) in Kodumbu Village in Palakkad District. 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.954/2020. The petitioner is aggrieved by the delay

in conclusion of the proceedings and her solitary prayer is for directions to the

respondent to expedite the same.

3. I have heard Sri.Rajesh Sivaramankutty, the learned counsel for the

petitioner and Smt.K Amminikutty, the learned senior Government Pleader.

4. Sri.Rajesh Sivaramankutty, 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.