Kerala High Court
Shahul Hameed vs Special Tahsildar (L.R), ... on 11 August, 2021
WP(C) NO. 16277 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. 16277 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
SHAHUL HAMEED
AGED 36 YEARS
S/O. RAHEEM ABDULLA, C.V.M. MANZIL, CHIMBUKAD,
THENKURISSI-II VILLAGE, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD
BY ADV V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL)
RESPONDENT/S:
SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (L.R),
OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (L.R),
MINI CIVIL STATION, OTTAPALAM, PATTAMBI,
PALAKKAD-679 104.
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. 16277 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.520/2021 on the file of the Special Tahsildar (L.R), Pattambi
within a time limit as deems fit by this Hon'ble Court.
2. The petitioner states that he along with certain others are in
possession of property admeasuring 0.0081 Ha. comprised in Re-Sy.No.281/10
of Thenkurissi-I 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.520/2021. The petitioner is aggrieved by the delay in conclusion of the
proceedings and his solitary prayer is for directions to the respondent to
expedite the same.
3. I have heard Sri.Johnson Varikkappallil, the learned counsel for the
petitioner and Smt. K.Amminikutty, the learned Senior Government Pleader.
4. Sri.Johnson Varikkappallil, 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 Special
Tahsildar (L.R.), Pattambi to dispose of S.M.No.520 of 2021, following the
directions issued by this Court in Narayanan Namboodiri (supra) and in
accordance with law.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
JUDGE
IAP
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16277/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE
RESPONDENT DATED 07.07.2021
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL
