Najjoomunneesa vs Special Tahsildar (La & Lt) ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 15288 Ker

WP(C) NO. 14540 OF 2021       1



           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
       THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
    THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JULY 2021 / 31ST ASHADHA, 1943
                     WP(C) NO. 14540 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:

          NAJJOOMUNNEESA, W/O.LATE MUSTHAFA,
          AGED 61 YEARS, KOLATHADIYAN HOUSE, THENKARA P.O.,
          MANNARKKAD-I VILLAGE, MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD
          DISTRICT, PIN-678 595.




          BY ADV SHIJU VARGHESE



RESPONDENT/S:

          SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA & LT) ATTAPPADI,
          ATTAPPADI P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-679 104.



                BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MATHEW GEORGE VADAKKEL




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 14540 OF 2021                     2



                                        JUDGMENT

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

seeking the following reliefs:

(i) issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ, order or direction, commanding the respondent to dispose of the application for Pattayam submitted by the petitioner and numbered as SMP No.88/2021 within a time limit fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

2. The petitioner states that she is in possession of 6.17 Ares of land

comprised in Sy.No.151/6,7 of Mannarkkad-I Village as per document

No.3839/1993 of Mannarkkad SRO. She contends that she had applied for

issuance of patta with the respondent and the case was taken on file by the

respondent and the same is pending as SMP No.88/2021. The petitioner is

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

is for directions to the respondent to expedite the same.

3. I have heard Sri. Shiju Varghese, the learned counsel for the

petitioner and Sri. Mathew George Vakakkel, the learned Government Pleader.

4. Sri. Shiju Varghese, 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 SMP No.88 of 2021, following the directions issued by this Court

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

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE

NS

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14540/2021

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 28.01.2021.

Exhibit P2          TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED
                    28.01.2021.



RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS      NIL