Reena vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 20010 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
  FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 2ND ASWINA,
                            1943
                   WP(C) NO. 17324 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:

    1      REENA
           AGED 51 YEARS
           W/O SANU,
           HOUSE WIFE,
           MALAYIL PARAMBA QUARTERS,
           CHETTIPADY P.O,
           PARAPPANANGADI-676319.

    2      RADHA
           AGED 53 YEARS
           W/O VIJAYAN, HOUSE WIFE, NECHOLI HOUSE,
           P.O.PARAPPANANGADI, MALAPPURAM-676303.

    3      HAFSATH
           AGED 38 YEARS
           W/O UMMER, HOUSE WIFE,
           WHITE FALCOM QUARTERS,
           THALANCHERI ROAD,
           PARAPPANGADI VILLAGE, PIN-676303.

    4      ASHARAF AYISHABI
           AGED 35 YEARS
           HOUSE WIFE, AMMARAMBATH, KODAPPALI-676303.

    5      SANTHOSH.V.
           AGED 38 YEARS
           S/O CHATHANKUTTY,
           VEETHINGAL HOUSE,
           INIPAD COLONY,
           PARAPPANANGADI NEDUVA P.O,
           PIN-676303.

           BY ADVS.
           K.MOHAMMED FAISAL NAHA
           P.A.PETER
           TINTU GEORGE
 WPC 17324/2021
                                  2

RESPONDENT/S:

    1        STATE OF KERALA
             REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1.

    2        LAND REVENUE JOINT COMMISSIONER
             OFFICE OF LAND REVENUE JOINT COMMISSIONER,
             MUSEUM.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-33.

    3        DEPUTY COLLECTOR(L.R)
             MALAPPURAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676505.

    4        DISTRICT COLLECTOR
             MALAPPURAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676505.

    5        ADDL.TAHASILDHAR
             TALUK OFFICE, THIRUVANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM(DT)-
             676306.

    6        VILLAGE OFFICER
             NADUVA, P.O, PARAPPANANGADI, MALAPPURAM(DISRICT),
             PIN-676303.

             BY ADV GOVERNMENT PLEADER



OTHER PRESENT:

             SRI. ASWIN SETHUMADHAVAN - GP




      THIS    WRIT   PETITION    (CIVIL)   HAVING   COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION     ON   24.09.2021,   THE   COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WPC 17324/2021
                                  3



                   DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J.
                            ------------------------
                       WP(C) No.17324 of 2021
                       ----------------------------------
             Dated, this the 24th day of September, 2021

                          JUDGMENT

The petitioners, who are stated to be without any land

in their names, claim to be entitled to assignment of three

cents of land each, under the "Zero Landless (Citizens)

Kerala Project, 2015", which is spearheaded by Government

of Kerala.

2. According to the petitioners, they have pointed out

at least two properties which are eligible to be assigned to

them, but that the District Collector has now issued Ext.P10

order, dated 6.10.2020, rejecting their requests saying that

both those lands are not suitable for being assigned.

3. The peitioners say that the reasons in Ext.P10 are

wholly untenable; and thus pray that the same be set aside

and the District Collector be directed to assign lands to them WPC 17324/2021

in one of the areas mentioned therein, within a time frame to

be fixed by this Court.

4. The afore submissions, on behalf of the

petitioners, made by Sri.K.Mohammed Faisal Naha, were

refuted vehementally by the learned Government Pleader -

Sri.Aswin Sethumadhavan, showing me that, as can be

seen from Ext.P10 itself, the first property identified by the

petitioners is classified as "kulam purampoke" in the Basic

Tax Register (BTR) and that it has been included in the Data

Bank prepared under the provisions of the Kerala

Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act (hereinafter

referred to as 'Wet Land Act'). He then proceeded to show

me that, as regards the second extent identified by the

petitioners, the same remains as "Government Land for

PWD Department" and that this is required in future for

maintenance of certain installations of the Irrigation

Department. He then added that there are no other lands WPC 17324/2021

available in the Village in question and consequently, that

the petitioners can now be only included, for allotment of

residential units, under the "Life Mission Project". He,

therefore, prayed that this writ petition be dismissed.

5. The afore rival submissions being recorded, when

I examine Ext.P10, it is clear that it refers to two separate

extents of properties. The first one, as rightly stated by

Sri.Aswin Sethumadhavan, has been classified as a "kulam"

in the BTR; while the second extent is stated to be reserved

for the purpose of Irrigation/PWD Department.

6. However, when I go through the reasons stated in

Ext.P10 with respect to the first extent of land, it only says

that it has been included as a "kulam" in the BTR, but it is

the common knowledge that the said entry may have been

made several decades ago. It is also possible, as rightly

argued by Sri.Mohammed Faisal Naha - learned counsel for

the petitioners, that the entry in the BTR perhaps may have WPC 17324/2021

been automatically adopted for including it under the Data

Bank under the Wet Land Act. This certainly is a question of

fact, which will require to be assessed properly by the

District Collector, who is also the competent Authority under

the Wet Land Act. I say this because, as on 2008, when the

Wet Land Act came into force, if the property had been

converted into "dry land", as asserted by the petitioners,

then notwithstanding, this classification in the BTR, it will

require to be removed from the Data Bank and can then be

considered for being assigned to the petitioners.

7. However, I make it clear that, as regards the

second extent, this Court does not intend to take a view

contrary to the findings in Ext.P10, since it is certainly

plausible that the said land is required for future

development for the PWD and Irrigation Departments, as

stated therein.

8. Resultantly, I allow this writ petition and set aside WPC 17324/2021

Ext.P10 order to the limited extent to which it relates to the

property in re-survey No.493/4 (old survey No.331/3A),

Block No.25 of Neduva Village and direct the District

Collector to reconsider the petitioners' request for

assignment of the same, after affording them an opportunity

of being heard and after carefully evaluating all germane

and relevant inputs, including the satellite images to be

obtained from the KSREC, with respect to the nature of the

property in the year 2008, when the "Wet Land Act" was

brought into force.

9. The afore exercise shall be completed by the

District Collector as expeditiously as is possible, but not

later than four months from the date of receipt of a copy of

this judgment. Needless to say, consequent thereto, if it is

found that the property is a "dry land", capable of being

assigned, then necessary steps in favour of the petitioners

shall be completed without any further delay thereafter, but WPC 17324/2021

not later than three months therefrom.

10. At this time, Sri.Mohammed Faisal Naha -

learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that his clients

have also pointed out another property through Ext.P4. If

this is so, certainly, the District Collector will consider the

suitability of the said property also, while completing the

exercise as ordered above.

This writ petition is thus ordered.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JUDGE jg WPC 17324/2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17324/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER FROM WEBSITE OF REVENUE DEPARTMENT.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 18/11/16 SUBMITTED BY SHARAFUDHEEN BEFORE THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION OFFICER NEDUVA VILLAGE.

Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY TO THE EXT.P2 PETITION DATED 8.12.16 SHOWING AVAILABILITY OF 2 ACRES OF LAND WITH PWD AND REVENUE DEPARTMENT.

Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT SHOWING HUGE EXTENT OF UNUSED LANDS WITH IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONERS UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT.

Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 5.12.2015 IN WPC .34266/2015.

Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 8.12.2015 IN THE CONTEMPT CASE NO.980/2016 IN EXT.P5 WPC.

Exhibit P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 6.1.18 THAT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS.

Exhibit P8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 14.03.19 IN WPC NO.16270/18.

Exhibit P9 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY UNDER R.T.A.

RECEIVED FROM 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 25/08/2020.

WPC 17324/2021

Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 06.10.2020 OF DISTRICT COLLECTOR.

Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27/07/19, NO.KL-9004(2) SENT BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO 4TH RESPONDENT DISTRICT COLLECTOR.

Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 06.01.2020, NO.P3-9004/14 SENT BY 5TH RESPONDENT TO 4TH RESPONDENT,. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY UNDER RTA DATED 16.09.19 RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONERS FROM NEDUVA VILLAGE OFFICE.