Kerala High Court
Poulose @ Baby vs The Tahasildar
Author: P.R.Ramachandra Menon
Bench: P.R.Ramachandra Menon
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALAAT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
TUESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2013/21ST KARTHIKA, 1935
WP(C).No. 24920 of 2013 (L)
----------------------------
PETITIONER : -
----------------------
POULOSE @ BABY, S/O.CHACKO,
AGED 68 YEARS,
CHATHAN KUZHIYIL,
THIRUVANIYOOR P.O.,
KUNNATHUNADU TALUK,
ERNAKULAM, PIN 682 308.
BY ADVS.SRI.P.MARTIN JOSE
SRI.P.PRIJITH
RESPONDENTS : -
--------------------------
1. THE TAHASILDAR,
KUNNATHUNADU TALUK,
PERUMBAVOOR, PIN 683 542.
2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
THIRUVANIYOOR,
PIN: 682 308.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. LILLY K.T.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
12-11-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 24920 of 2013 (L)
---------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : -
----------------------------------------
EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF PARTITION DEED NO.3706 OF 1967 OF AIYKKANADU SRO.
EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 20/7/92 EVIDENCING THE PAYMENT OF
PROHIBITORY TAX.
EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 6/4/2013 EVIDENCING THE PAYMENT OF
PROHIBITORY TAX TO THE PROPERTY FOR THE PERIOD 2013-2014.
EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 22/5/2013 SUBMITTED BY
PETITIONER BEFORE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED NIL BEFORE THE 1ST
RESPONDENT.
EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF REPORT DATED 10/6/2013 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXT.P6(a): TRUE COPY OF NOTES DATED 12/6/2013 OF 1ST RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : - NIL.
---------------------------------------
// TRUE COPY //
P.A. TO JUDGE
DMR/-
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON,J.
---------------------------------------
W.P (C) NO. 24920 of 2013
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 12th day of November, 2013
JUDGMENT
The dispute is with regard to property having an extent of 18.40 Ares in Re. Survey No. 233/1 (Old survey No.25/2A) in Block No.41 of Thiruvaniyoor Village, Kunnathunadu Taluk, which is stated as forming part of Ext.P1 partition deed executed before the SRO, Ayikkaranadu. The case of the petitioner is that, the said property was being enjoyed by the predecessors-in-interest and now by the petitioner, for more than 60 years and that the said property is absolutely necessary for the beneficial enjoyment of his property, which is situated nearby. It is in the said circumstance, that the petitioner has filed Ext.P4 and P5 for assignment of the land. Pursuant to the said applications, Ext.P6 report was submitted by the second respondent, on receipt of which, some more clarification was sought for by W.P (C) NO. 24920 of 2013 2 the first respondent as borne by Ext.P6. It is stated that the petitioner is also satisfying the prohibitory tax in respect of the said extent of 18.40 Ares as evidenced from Exts.P2 and P3. The delay in finalizing the proceedings made the petitioner to approach this Court by filing the writ petition.
2. It is asserted from the part of the respondents with reference to Section 8(2) of the Kerala Land Conservancy Act that, in so far as the petitioner admits the satisfaction of the prohibitory assessment and payment of tax, the claim that he is having absolute ownership and other rights over the property is not liable to be considered in his favour. The stand of the respondents with regard to the course and events sought to be pursued is described in paragraph 3 and 4, which are reproduced below : -
(3)It is submitted that the petitioner owns an extent of 89.52 Ares (2.21 Acres) of land in Sy No.233/4 and an extent of 12.00 Ares (29.652 Cents) in Sy No.233/7 of Thiruvaniyoor Village. According to the new regulations set up by the Government vide order No. G.O. (MS) 280/2011/RD the Government has restricted land assignment and directed to assign land only for landless and poor for making house.
petitioner is not eligible for land assignment.Hence also the It is submitted that the aforesaid land is not necessary for the beneficial enjoyment of his registered property. So also the petitioner's claim fails.
(4)Zero aforesaid puramboke land is now included in the The Landless Project declared by the State to assign land for the poor and landless people in Kerala. As the W.P (C) NO. 24920 of 2013 3 puramboke land is now required for assigning under zero Landless Project and hence petitioner's claim cannot be considered.
3. After hearing both the sides this Court finds that, a reasoned order has to be passed by the first respondent on Exts.P4 and P5 so as to enable the petitioner to proceed with further steps. In the said circumstance, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the first respondent to finalize Exts.P4/P5 proceedings in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner at the earliest, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 'Status quo' shall continue till such time.
The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the concerned respondent for further steps.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE DMR/-