Vakkachan @ C.A.Varghese vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 16865 Ker

WP(C) NO. 16621 OF 2021        1

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
  THURSDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 21ST SRAVANA, 1943
                      WP(C) NO. 16621 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          VAKKACHAN @ C.A.VARGHESE,
          AGED 70 YEARS
          S/O.ANTO, CHAKKALAKAL HOUSE, RAMESWARAM VILLAGE,
          P.D.ROAD, PALLURUTHY, KOCHI,

          ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682 006.

          BY ADV JISHA P.C.



RESPONDENTS:

    1     STATE OF KERALA,
          REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
          GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, TRIVANDRUM-1.

    2     THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
          COLLECTORATE, ERNAKULAM-682 030.

    3     THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LR),
          LAND TRIBUNAL, COLLECTORATE, ERNAKULAM-682 030.

    4     THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR (LR),
          LAND TRIBUNAL, 3RD FLOOR, MINI CIVIL STATION, MAIN
          ROAD, TRIPPUNITHURA, KOCHI, ERNAKULAM-682 031.

    5     THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
          VILLAGE OFFICE, RAMESWARAM, PALLURUTHY, COCHI,
          ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682 006.



          SRI SAYED M THANGAL, GOVERNMENT PLEADER


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
12.08.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 16621 OF 2021                 2

                                    JUDGMENT

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

seeking the following reliefs:

i) Writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 3rd and 4th respondents to dispose the SMP No. 192/2018 renumbered as O.A. 56/2020 on the files of the 4th respondent within a time frame of one month

2. The petitioner states that he along with certain others have been

in possession of property having an extent of 2.83 Ares comprised in

Sy.No.900/1 of Rameswaram Village. On the basis of an application filed by

the petitioner, suo motu proceeding has been initiated by the 3rd 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 was taken on file as SMP

No. 7909/1976. It is submitted that the proceedings were later forwarded to

the office of the 4th respondent and the same has been numbered as

O.A.No.56/2020, which fact would be evident from Ext.P8. The petitioner is

aggrieved by the delay in conclusion of the proceedings and his solitary prayer

is for directions to the 4th respondent to expedite the same.

3. I have heard Miss. Jisha P.C., the learned counsel for the

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

4. 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 directing the 4th

respondent to dispose of O.A.No.56/2020, following the directions issued by

this Court in Narayanan Namboodiri (supra) and in accordance with law.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE ps

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16621/2021

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE UNDER FORM E, SEC.72(F)(2) RULE 7(1) FOR HEARING OF SMP 7909/76 ISSUED BY THE R3 DATED 04.11.1976.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR THE PURCHASE CERTIFICATE DATED ON 06.10.2017.

Exhibit P3          TRUE COPY OF NOTICE UNDER FORM E,
                    SEC.72(F)(2) RULE 7(1) FOR HEARING OF SMP
                    NO.192/2018 DATED 27.02.2019.

Exhibit P4          TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH PLAN AND REPORT
                    DATED 16.12.2017 SUBMITTED BY RAMESWARAM
                    VILLAGE OFFICER,

Exhibit P5          TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE
                    ISSUED BY RAMEASWARAM VILLAGE OFFICER
                    DATED 16.12.2017 TO THE PETITIONER.

Exhibit P6          TRUE COPY OF REVIEW APPLICATION DATED
                    10.03.2020.

Exhibit P7          TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 13.10.2020 TO
                    APPLICATION UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION
                    ACT.

Exhibit P8          TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 25.11.2020 TO
                    RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT.

Exhibit P9          TRUE COPY OF MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DATED
                    28.10.2020 ISSUED BY DR.JAYSANKER-MBBS,
                    MD,DM.

RESPONDENTS'EXHIBITS:

                     NIL