Kerala High Court
Joemon Joseph vs The Commissioner Of Land Revenue on 25 May, 1970
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2014/15TH KARTHIKA, 1936
WP(C).No. 15220 of 2013 (B)
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-----------------------
1. JOEMON JOSEPH, S/O. JOSEPH,
EDATHALA HOUSE, NEELEESWARAM P.O.,
KALADY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
2. T.P.SABU, S/O. V.I.POULOSE,
THALIYATH HOUSE, NEELEESWARAM P.O.,
KALADY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
3. PAUL WILSON, S/O. V.I.POULOSE,
THALIYATH HOUSE, NEELEESWARAM P.O.,
KALADY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.BABU S. NAIR
SMT.SMITHA BABU
SRI.P.A.RAJESH
SRI.K.RAKESH
SRI.R.RANJITH (K/489/2011)
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------------------
1. THE COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
ERNAKULAM, PIN-682030.
3. THE TAHSILDAR, ALUVA TALUK,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-683101.
4. THE GEOLOGIST,
DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND GEOLOGY,
CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682030.
BY SENIOR GOVT. PLEADER SRI.ABDUL SALAM
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 06-11-2014 ALONG WITH WPC. 15746/2013 & CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
mbr/
WP(C).No. 15220 of 2013 (B)
---------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:
-------------------------------------
EXHIBIT P1- TRUE COPY OF THE PATTA DATED 25-5-1970 AS ALSO THE FORM OF
ORDER OF ASSIGNMENT ACCOMPANYING THE SAME.
EXHIBIT P2- TRUE COPY OF THE QUARRYING LEASE GRANTED TO THE
FIRST PETITIONER BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED , 27-3-2008.
EXHIBIT P3- TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 7-4-2010 IN
WPC NO. 10589/2010 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.
EXHIBIT P4- TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 1-12-2010 IN
W.A.NO. 1164/2010 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.
EXHIBIT P5- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 9-12-2011 IN C.C.NO. 20120/2011 IN
S.L.P.(C).../2011 OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA.
EXHIBIT P6- TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED TO THE
FIRST PETITIONER DATED 10-8-2009 BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN A.R.NO. 43/2010 AND CONNECTED
CASES DATED 25-3-2011 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.
EXHIBIT P8- TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS IN S.L.P.NO. 696, 701 AND 703 OF
2012 DATED 9-1-2012 OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA.
EXHIBIT P9- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT
DATED, 9-5-2013 AS NO. LR A2-18309/13.
EXHIBIT P10- TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT,
DATED 11-06-2013 AS NO. DOE/3080/13.
EXHIBIT P11- TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS
BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS 1,2 AND 4 DATED, 12-6-2013 WITHOUT
ANNEXURES.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:
---------------------------------------
EXT R1(A) : PHOTOCOPY OF THE G.O.(MS)NO.150/2013/REV. DEPT.
DATED 23.4.2013.
EXT R1(B) : PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P(C)NO.9605/2008
DATED 13.8.2009.
EXT R1(C) : PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN APPEAL WA.NO.1908/2009
DATED 25.8.2009.
/TRUE COPY/
P.S. TO JUDGE
mbr/
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
W.P.(C).Nos.
15220/2013 20668/2013
15746/2013 21101/2013
16054/2013 21395/2013
16932/2013 21948/2013
17503/2013 22525/2013
17825/2013 27523/2013
19155/2013 &
19755/2013 27934/2013
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dated this the 6th day of November, 2014
J U D G M E N T
These batch of writ petitions are filed by holders of lands, assigned under the Kerala Government Land Assignment Act, 1960 (for short, the "LA Act") and the Kerala Land Assignment Rules, 1964 (for short, the "LA Rules"). They have approached this Court challenging order of cancellation of quarrying permits granted by the Geologist based on the directions of the Land Revenue Commissioner. In some of the cases, stop memos were issued by the Geologist for stopping the W.P.(C).No.15220/2013 and connected cases -:2:- activities of quarrying on the ground that operation of quarrying is in violation of LA Act and LA Rules.
2. The reason for taking action against the petitioners for cancellation of quarrying permits are on the ground that the lands were assigned for the specific purpose like agriculture activities and also on the ground that without obtaining any permission from the competent authority, the lands are being used for quarrying purposes.
3. The LA Act is an Act enacted to provide for the assignment of Government lands. The Government lands may be assigned by the Government or the competent authority either absolutely or subject to such restrictions, limitations and conditions as may be prescribed. When government lands are assigned absolutely, the lands belong to the assignees absolutely without any fetter or burden. When lands are given for certain purposes as enumerated in Rule 4 of the LA Rules framed under the LA Act, the order of assignment of such land is to use it for specific W.P.(C).No.15220/2013 and connected cases -:3:- purposes. Rule 8 of LA Rules prescribe conditions of assignment of land on registry. These conditions provide the manner in which the lands have to be used when those were assigned on specific purposes as contemplated under Rule 4 of the LA Rules. The violation of conditions, also calls for cancellation of registry. Appendix I under the Rules is the "form of order of assignment on registry". The orders of assignment also prescribe the conditions for assignment. Appendix II under the Rules is the "form of patta". This also enumerates conditions.
4. Thus, the holders of lands unless these are assigned to them absolutely, are bound by the terms and conditions of assignment as enumerated in the patta or in the order of assignment. The petitioners were granted quarrying permits by the Geologist as though the petitioners have no impediment in carrying out the quarrying operation in the land held by them by virtue of the patta issued under the Land Assignment Rules. These licences are now called upon to cancel on the W.P.(C).No.15220/2013 and connected cases -:4:- premise that the activities therein are in violation of the conditions in the LA Rules.
5. The Geologist or any other Authority cannot interfere with the legal right enured to the petitioners by virtue of land assignment. If the petitioners have violated conditions of patta, the competent authority is having sufficient power to proceed against the petitioners, to cancel/revoke the patta. This has to be done by independent proceedings by an authority, which is competent under the LA Rules. In collateral proceedings related to quarrying such decision cannot be taken by the Geologist or any other authorities. No doubt, when patta is revoked or cancelled, the Geologist is free to cancel such licence based on such decision. The petitioners are entitled to defend cancellation of assignment in terms of LA Act and LA Rules. The proceedings have to be initiated under the LA Act and LA Rules to cancel the patta. Whether the petitioners have violated conditions of patta or not will have to be determined in such W.P.(C).No.15220/2013 and connected cases -:5:- proceedings. Thus, I am of the view that cancellation of the quarrying permits by the Geologist on the ground that petitioners have violated conditions of patta issued under LA Act and LA Rules is illegal and unsustainable.
6. In the result:-
i. The writ petitions are allowed and the impugned orders are quashed.
ii. The petitioners are free to use the land in their possession in accordance with law. iii. The Geologist is free to take action against the petitioners for cancellation of the quarrying permits, based on any decision taken by the competent authority under the LA Rules.
iv. The petitioners are also entitled for renewal of quarrying licence in accordance with law subject to initiation of proceedings against petitioners in accordance with LA Act and LA Rules. No costs.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE ms