Kerala High Court
V.V.Jayalakshmi vs State Of Kerala on 20 June, 2024
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 30TH JYAISHTA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 33434 OF 2018
PETITIONERS:
1 V.V.JAYALAKSHMI, AGED 69 YEARS
W/O NARAYANA MARAR, PRAVEENALAYAM, THIRUNELLI
TEMPLE P.O., MANANTHAVADY, WAYANAD DISTRICT.
2 V.V PRAMOD, AGED 48 YEARS
S/O. NARAYANA MARAR, PRAVEENALAYAM, THIRUNELLI
TEMPLE P.O, MANANTHAVADY, WAYANAD DISTRICT.
3 PRAVEENA, AGED 46 YEARS
D/O. NARAYANAN MARAR, PRAVEENALAYAM,THIRUNELLI
TEMPLE P.O, MANANTHAVADY, WAYANAD DISTRICT
4 PRASEETHA, AGED 44 YEARS
D/O. NARAYANAN MARAR, PRAVEENALAYAM, THIRUNELLI
TEMPLE P.O, MANANTHAVADY, WAYANAD DISTRICT.
5 PRATHEEKSHA, AGED 42 YEARS
D/O. NARAYANA MARAR, PRAVEENALAYAM, THIRUNELLI
TEMPLE P.O, MANANTHAVADY, WAYANAD DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
T.G.RAJENDRAN
SRI.T.R.TARIN
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY,
SECRETERIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
WAYANAD 670 645
3 THE THAHSILDAR,
MANANTHAVADY, WAYANAD DISTRICT 670 645
4 THIRUNELLI GRAMA PANCHAYATH
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THIRUNELLY,
KATTIKULAM, WAYANAD 670 646
5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, THIRUNELLI VILLAGE OFFICE,
THIRUNELLY, WAYANAD 670 646.
W.P(C).33434/2018
2
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.B.S.SYAMANTAK, GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 20.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.P(C).33434/2018
3
P. V. KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
-------------------------------------------
W.P(C).No.33434 of 2018
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 20th day of June, 2024
JUDGMENT
The above Writ Petition is filed with the following prayers:
a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any appropriate
writ order of direction, directing the Respondents to
issue purchase certificate in favour of the Petitioners
pursuant to Ext P3 order of assignment on registry.
b) directing the Respondents not to take any
action evicting the Petitioners from the premises in
RS No. 73 of Thirunelli Village, Mananthavady Taluk.
c) direct the 3rd Respondent to communicate the
orders passed pursuant to Ext P4 to the Petitioners.
d) grant such other reliefs prayed for from time to
time including cost of these proceedings.
[SIC]
2. When this Writ petition came up for consideration, the
Government Pleader takes me through paragraphs 4 and 5 of the
counter affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent. It will be better to
extract the relevant portion hereunder:
W.P(C).33434/2018
'It is submitted that the 3rd respondent ie Tahsildar
had issued only Grant Order to Sri Narayan Marar for an
extent of 59 cents of land in Thirunelly Village. The Grant
Order issued under section 9(1) of Land Assignment Rules is
a temporary document. In the Grant Order certain
conditions are laid down, such as payment of tree value. LA
dues, Land Value etc. These are to be paid by the assignee
within the specified period. In this case, the assignee had
not remitted the Land Assignment dues of Rs.160.41 within
the specified period. Hence, patta under section 9(2) was
not issued. Therefore, the petitioner's claim is not true.
Paragraph 5 of the Writ Petition reveals that the petitioner
are having landed property in Thirunelly Village. Hence the
contention of the petitioners that they are not having land is
not correct. Sri. Narayana Marar was served with B form
notice only because he tries to occupy the land even after
this application for assignment has been rejected. The land
in question was not in possession of the petitioners. The
land has already been vested in Land Banks after eviction in
2014. Now the land is fully fenced and protected from any
encroachment. The land in question cannot be assigned to
the petitioners as they are not land less.
5. It is submitted that Additional Chief Secretary
to Government has rejected the application of the
petitioners for assignment vide 136/L3/ 2017/Rev.dated
22.11.2017 stating that the petitioners were not able to
produce any document to prove possession, they are having
other valuable landed properties and that the land is
commercially important and can be utilized for Government
purposes. The true copy of order of Additional Chief
Secretary to Government is produced herewith and marked
as Exhibit R3(b).'
3. In the light of the same, if the petitioners are aggrieved
by the orders passed, the petitioners are free to challenge the same
in accordance with law.
W.P(C).33434/2018
4. When this matter came up for consideration on
12.10.2018, a status quo order was passed. The status quo order
was extended until further orders on 21.11.2019. In such
circumstances, to facilitate the petitioners to challenge
Exhibit-R3(a), the status quo order can be extended for a period of
30 days from today. Therefore, the status quo order will continue
for a period of 30 days from today to facilitate the petitioners to do
the needful in accordance with law.
Granting liberty to the petitioners to challenge the orders
passed, if they are aggrieved by the same, this Writ Petition is
disposed of. All other contentions raised by the petitioners in this
Writ Petition are left open.
Sd/-
P. V. KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
Sbna/
W.P(C).33434/2018
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 33434/2018
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE ISSUED
BY THE SUB REGISTRAR OF MANANTHAVADY GRAMA
PANCHAYATH DATED 3-4-2003
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE
5TH DATED 26-6-2008
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. DK 196/67 DATED
29-07-1967 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT DATED 10-02-1999
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OP 4548/2001
DATED 16-2-2001
RESPONDENT EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT R3(a) A TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF RDO
EXHIBIT R3(b) A TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF
SECRETARY GOVERNMENT
