Kerala High Court
Sheeba Vijayan vs The State Of Kerala on 15 January, 2007
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
MONDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2017/6TH CHAITHRA, 1939
WP(C).No. 5054 of 2013 (F)
---------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-------------
SHEEBA VIJAYAN,
AGED 40 YEARS, W/O VIJAYAN,
NEW COLONY, PALARIVATTOM,
EDAPPALLY SOUTH,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.M.R.NANDAKUMAR
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY
TO SCHEDULED CASTE AND SCHEDULED
TRIBE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT (E),
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2. THE SECRETARY TO THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
3. DIRECTOR,
SCHEDULED TRIBE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
THIRUVANANTHAPRUAM-695 001.
4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
ERNAKULAM-682 030.
5. THE THAHASILDAR,
KANAYANNUR TALUK,
ERNAKULAM-682 011.
6. THE TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,
TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT OFFICE,
MINI CIVIL STATION,
MUDAVOOR P.O. 686 669,
MUVATTUPUZHA,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
7. THE CORPORATION OF COCHIN,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
CORPORATION OFFICE-682 011,
ERNAKULAM.
R1-R6 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. RAJI T. BHASKAR
R7 BY ADVS. SRI.DILEESH JOHN,SC
SRI.P.K.SOYUZ,SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
27-03-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
EL
WP(C).No. 5054 of 2013 (F)
---------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
EXHIBIT P1: PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE HOMESTEAD OF THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE PROPERTY TAX ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY
THE 6TH RESPONDENT DATED 15.1.2007.
EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY PROPERTY TAX RECEIPT DATED 16.1.2007, 24.5.2008
AND 14.9.2012.
EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY HE ASSISTANT
ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, KSEB PALARIVATTOM.
EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD ISSUED BY THE COCHIN
CORPORATION.
EXHIBIT P6: TRUE COPY OF THE RATION CARD OF THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P7: TRUE COPY OF THE ELECTION IDENTITY CARD OF THE
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P8: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR ASSIGNMENT OF LAND
SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P9: TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE VILLAGE OFFICER EDAPPALLY
TO THE TAHSILDAR KANAYANNUR DATED 15.11.2006.
EXHIBIT P10:TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 5TH
RESPONDENT DATED 22.9.2006.
EXHIBIT P11:TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF BENEFICIARIES OF BSUP.
EXHIBIT P12:TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE VILLAGE OFFICER EDAPPALLY
TO THE TAHSILDAR KANAYANNUR DATED 22.4.2008.
EXHIBIT P13:TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 3.10.2006 FILED BEFORE
THE MINISTER AGAINST THE TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT OFFICER.
EXHIBIT P14:TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 14.10.2008 SUBMITTED
BEFORE THE KERALA STATE COMMISSION FOR SCHEDULED CASTE
AND SCHEDULED TRIBES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AGAINST THE
TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT OFFICER.
EXHIBIT P15:TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT OF THIS COURT DATED
19.3.2012 IN WPC NO.7039/2007 AND WPC NO.2248/2008.
EXHIBIT P16:TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 16.4.2012
SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P17:TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 25.5.2012 OF THE ADDL.
TAHSILDAR KANAYANNUR TALUK TO THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
ERNAKULAM.
WP(C).No. 5054 of 2013 (F)
---------------------------
EXHIBIT P18:TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER GO NO.1171/12 DATED 27.8.2012
ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P19:TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR OF
SCHEDULED TRIBE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT THIRUVANANHAPURAM
DATED 29.9.2012.
EXHIBIT P20:TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT
OFFICER MUVATTUPUZHA DATED 2.1.2013.
EXHIBIT P21:TRUE COPY OF THE G.O(P) NO.63/2005/RD DATED 03.03.2005
EXHIBIT P22:TRUE COPY OF THE FORM OF PATTA NO.F1-20904/09 DATED
02.01.2010
EXHIBIT P23:TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.1025/14 DATED 03.07.2014
EXHIBIT P24:TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.328/2013/REVENUE DATED
05.08.2013
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
EXHIBIT R6(A): TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT
OFFICER ON 18.12.2006
TRUE COPY
P.S. TO JUDGE
EL
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J.
---------------------------------------
WP(C) No.5054 of 2013
---------------------------------------
Dated this the 27th day of March, 2017
JUDGMENT
The petitioner claims to be in possession of 2017 cents of land at Edappally, Ernakulam from the year 2001. She says that she applied for assignment of the said plot of land in her name, since she had no other property for her residence and because she had facing abject impecuniousness. Her application for assignment, however, was not considered in time and it was kept pending, at least till the year 2012.
2. In the meanwhile, in the year 2005, her husband, who was until then unemployed, obtained a posting in Government service and, therefore, when her application for assignment was considered in the year 2012, it led to a rejection on the ground that her husband is a Government servant and also because her WP(C) No.5054 of 2013 2 annual family income was above Rupees One lakh. This order of the Government namely, Ext.P18 is impugned in this writ petition.
3. I have heard Sri.M.R. Nandakumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.Dileesh John, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 6th respondent and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 5.
4. I have examined Ext.P18 order, which is assailed by the petitioner. I see that the only reasons why the application of the petitioner for assignment has been rejected is that her husband is now a Government servant and because her annual income presently is over One Lakh Rupees.
5. It is pertinent that the petitioner made an application for assignment as early as in the year 2001 and that she and her family have been continuing in a small hutment, constructed in the said property, ever since 2001. She even now maintains that she has no other means of residence and that if she is sent out of this property, she and her family would be extirpated. As regards the annual family income is concerned, the learned counsel for WP(C) No.5054 of 2013 3 the petitioner contends, based on Rule 7 of the Kerala Land Assignment Rules [for brevity, the Rules], that in the case of assignment of land reserved for the members of SC/ST communities, this rigor would not apply. I am certain that these are issues which cannot be considered by this Court acting under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, since these are squarely within the domain of disputation of facts. These issues will be best left to be considered and resolved by the competent Authorities acting under the relevant Statutes, Rules and Regulations.
6. In such circumstances, I quash Ext.P18 order and direct the competent Secretary of the Government of Kerala to reconsider the case of the petitioner with specific reference to her contention that her application was made much prior to her husband obtaining employment in Government service and that she and her family has no other means of residence other than the property in which she is living, over which she has claimed assignment. The benefit of Rule 7 of the Rules, if applicable to the petitioner, would also be one of the factors that the WP(C) No.5054 of 2013 4 Authorities will have to take into account while making this reconsideration. I direct the competent Secretary to issue orders as directed herein, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner or her authorised representative as expeditiously as possible, but not later than four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.
7. Obviously, since I have directed the reconsideration of the petitioner's case, no action against her from eviction of the property in question will be initiated or continued until such time as the competent Secretary takes a final decision and communicates such order to the petitioner.
This writ petition is thus ordered as above. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, I make no order as to costs and I direct the parties to suffer their respective costs.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JUDGE.
//True Copy// P.A. to Judge sp/04/04/17