Kerala High Court
Seenath vs Land Tribunal (Devaswom) on 27 July, 2021
WP(C) NO. 14843 OF 2021 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 5TH SRAVANA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 14843 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
SEENATH
W/O RASHEED,
KALAPPADAN HOUSE, KOTTOOR P.O.,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV U.K.DEVIDAS
RESPONDENT/S:
1 LAND TRIBUNAL,(DEVASWOM),COLLECTORATE,
UP HILL P.O., MALAPPURAM-676505.
2 DEPUTY COLLECTOR, (LAND REFORMS),
LAND TRIBUNAL, COLLECTORATE, UP HILL P.O.,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676505.
SMT. K. AMMINIKUTTY, SR. GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 27.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 14843 OF 2021 2
JUDGMENT
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
seeking the following reliefs:
(i) a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or
direction to the respondents to dispose the S.M.No.235/2021 as
evidenced by Ext.P1 within a reasonable time.
2. The petitioner states that he is in exclusive possession of property
having an extent of 0.1564 Ha. of land comprised in Sy. No. 87/5 of Ponmala
Village. It appears from Ext.P1 certificate produced by the petitioner that a
suo moto proceeding has been initiated by the Land Tribunal (Devaswom)
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.235/2021. The petitioner is aggrieved by the delay in conclusion of
the proceedings and his solitary prayer is for directions to the respondents to
expedite the same.
3. I have heard Sri. U.K.Devidas, the learned counsel for the
petitioner and Smt. K.Amminikutty, the learned senior Government Pleader.
4. Sri. U.K.Devidas, 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 (Land Reforms), to dispose of S.M.No.235/2021, following the
directions issued by this Court in Narayanan Namboodiri (supra) and in
accordance with law.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
JUDGE
sru
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SUO MOTO REPORT OF THE
VILLAGE OFFICER DATED 15.04.2021 IN SM
NO.235/2021.
RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS: NIL
