Pathumma @ Fathima Umma vs The District Collector
2021 Latest Caselaw 16875 Ker

WP(C) NO. 16496 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. 16496 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

             PATHUMMA @ FATHIMA UMMA
             AGED 63 YEARS
             D/O. LATE MOHAMMED, MATHACKAL HOUSE, CHUNANGAD,
             OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT

             BY ADV P.JAYARAM



RESPONDENTS:

      1      THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
             PALAKKAD-678 001

      2      THE LAND TRIBUNAL/SEPCIAL TAHSILDAR,
             (LAND REFORMS) OTTAPALAM, MINI CIVIL STATION,
             OTTAPALAM-679 104

      3      THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
             AMBALAPPARA-II VILLAGE OFFICE,

             P.O.AMBALAPPARA-679 512

      4      STATE OF KERALA,
             REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
             GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001




             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. 16496 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 other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders in S.M.No.117/2021 proceedings in a time bound manner.

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

extent of 3.70 Ares comprised in Sy.No.598/1-1 of Ambalappara-II Village,

Ottappalam Taluk, Palakkad District. A suo moto proceeding has been

initiated by the 2nd 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.117/2021. The petitioner is aggrieved by the delay

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

2nd respondent to expedite the same.

3. I have heard Sri.P. Jayaram, the learned counsel for the petitioner

and Sri.Sayed. M. Thangal, the learned Government Pleader.

4. Sri.P. Jayaram, 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

Tahasildar (L.R.), Ottapalam, the 2nd respondent herein, to dispose of

S.M.No.117 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) 16496/2021

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 16.02.2021 IN SM 117/2021 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FROM THE OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND REFORMS) OTTAPALAM

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 04.08.2021 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FROM AMBALAPPARA -II VILLAGE WITH RESPECT TO PETITIONER'S PROPERTY

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

NIL