Kerala High Court
Ayyappan Ezhuthachan vs Deputy Collector (L.R.G7) on 13 August, 2021
WP(C) NO. 16716 OF 2021 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
FRIDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 22ND SRAVANA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 16716 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
AYYAPPAN EZHUTHACHAN
AGED 69 YEARS
S/O KOMBI EZHUTHACHAN,
PUNNEKKAD HOUSE, KANNAMBARIYARAM,
MANKARA.P.O, PALAKKAD.
BY ADV V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL)
RESPONDENT:
DEPUTY COLLECTOR (L.R.G7)
LAND TRIBUNAL, COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION,
PALAKKAD-678001.
SRI SAYED M THANGAL,GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
13.08.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 16716 OF 2021 2
JUDGMENT
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the
following relief:
(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other order or direction and direct the
respondent to pass appropriate orders in S.M.Case No.527/2012 on the File of
the Deputy Collector (L.R), Palakkad within a time limit as deems fit by this
Hon'ble Court.
2. The petitioner states that he is in possession and enjoyment of property having
an extent of 0.0440 Ha. comprised in Re-Sy.No.458/2 of Block No.10 of Mankara
Village, Palakkad District. A suo moto 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.527/2012. 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 Deputy Collector
(L.R.G7), Palakkad, the respondent herein, to dispose of S.M.No.527 of 2012, 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) 16716/2021
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE
RESPONDENT DATED 18.06.2012.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:
NIL
