Kerala High Court
Vasu vs Special Tahsildar ( L.R ) on 11 August, 2021
WP(C) NO. 16219 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. 16219 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
VASU
AGED 62 YEARS
S/O. LATE VALLI, PARAKODE HOUSE,
KIZHAKKANCHERRY - I VILLAGE, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD.
BY ADV V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL)
RESPONDENT/S:
SPECIAL TAHSILDAR ( L.R )
OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (L.R),
OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD - 679104.
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. 16219 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.119/2019 on the file of the Special Tahsildar (L.R),
Ottappalam, Palakkad within a time limit as deems fit by this Hon'ble
Court.
2. The petitioner states that he along with other applicants are in
possession of property comprised in Sy.No.19/3, 6 in Block No.41 of
Kizhakkancherry - I Village in Alathur Taluk of 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.119/2019. 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 Sri.Sayed M.Thangal, the learned 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 respondent
to dispose of S.M.No.119 of 2019, 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) 16219/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 18.01.2019
ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL
