Disposed

Badrudheen v. the Administrator

Kerala HC21 Nov 2013WP(C)/18538/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In connected writ petitions regarding unauthorized occupation of Government land in Androth Island, Lakshadweep, the Court directed the Administration to complete rehabilitation and eviction simultaneously by 31.12.2013 to avoid delays in constructing a jetty breakwater, prioritizing public infrastructure while allowing provisions for affected persons.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to complete rehabilitation and eviction simultaneously by 31.12.2013.

Badrudheen Vs the Administrator — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2013/30TH KARTHIKA, 1935

¶5

WP(C).No. 18538 of 2010 (N)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

1. BADRUDHEEN PUTHIYAVEEDU, ANDROTH ISLAND, U.T. OF LAKSHADWEEP.

¶8

2. BEEBI, D/O. NALLA KOYA THANGAL, SHEIKINTAVIDE VEEDI, ANDROTH ISLAND U.T. OF LAKSHADWEEP.

¶9

3. THANGAKOYA, S/O. POOKKOYA, KERAKKADA, ANDROTH ISLAND, U.T. OF LAKSHADWEEP.

¶10

4. SUHARABI KOODATT, D/O. POOKOYA, KANDETH HOUSE, ANDROTH ISLAND, U.T. OF LAKSHADWEEP.

¶11

5. KOYAMMA PANDARATH S/O. ATTAKOYA, ANDROTH ISLAND, U.T. OF LAKSHADWEEP.

¶12

6. KUNHIBI N.P.P. ANDROTH ISLAND, U.T. OF LAKSHADWEEP.

¶13

7. KASMIKOYA, S/O. PATHUMMADA,

¶14

ANDROTH ISLAND, U.T. OF LAKSHADWEEP.

¶15

8. BEEBIJAN, PUTHENMADOM, ANDROTH ISLAND, U.T. OF LAKSHADWEEP.

¶16

9. MUTHUKOYA.C.PALI, ANDROTH ISLAND, U.T. OF LAKSHADWEEP.

¶17

10. SUHARABI, W/O. KUNHISEETHI KOYA THANGAL, SHEIKINTAVIDE VEEDI, ANDROTH ISLAND U.T. OF LAKSHADWEEP.

¶18

11. SAFIYABI, D/O. KOYA, SHEKIRIYAMMADA, ANDROTH ISLAND, U.T. OF LAKSHADWEEP.

¶19

12. MOHAMMED NAJEEB, S/O. HAJIROMMABI, ANDROTH ISLAND, U.T. OF LAKSHADWEEP.

¶20

BY ADVS.SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN SMT.A.R.PRAVITHA

¶21

SMT.D.S.THUSHARA

¶22

DCS

¶23

WP(C).No. 18538 of 2010 (N)

¶24

RESPONDENT(S):

¶25

1. THE ADMINISTRATOR, U.T. OF LAKSHADWEEP. KAVARATTI, PIN- 682 555

¶26

2. THE COLLECTOR CUM DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, KAVARATHI, U.T. OF LAKSHADWEEP. PIN- 682 555

¶27

3. THE SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ANDROTH, U.T. OF LAKSHADWEEP. PIN- 682 555

¶28

4. THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR, (H.Q.), SECRETARIAT, KAVARATTI. PIN- 682 555

¶29

ADDL. R5 IMPLEADED

¶30

5. T.MUHAMMED HUSSAIN PRESIDENT TOWN PLAN ACTION COUNCIL, ANDROTH ANDROTH ISLAND, UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP

¶31

ADDL. R5 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 25.06.2010 IN I.A. NO. 8111/2010

¶32

R1 TO R4 BY ADV. SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, SC, LAKSHADWEEP ADMINISTRATION ADDL.R5 BY ADV. SRI.NIRMAL. S

¶33

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21-11-2013 ALONG WITH W.P.(C). NO. 26169/2010 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶34

DCS

¶35

WP(C).No. 18538 of 2010 (N)

¶36

APPENDIX

¶37

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶38

P1. COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C). NO.13237/06 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT

¶39

P2. COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR, KAVARATTI

¶40

P3. COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 18.09.2008 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONERS

¶41

P4. COPY OF THE ARGUMENT NOTE SUBMITED BY THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE COLLECTOR CUM DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER

¶42

P5. COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL ARGUMENT NOTE SUBMITTED BY THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE COLLECTOR CUM DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER

¶43

P6. COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 25.08.2009

¶44

P7. COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03.06.2010 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR

¶45

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:-

¶46

------------------ EXT. R1(a)	------------------------ COPY OF THE LAND REGISTER EXTRACT PREPARED IN THE YEAR 1972
EXT. R1(b)	COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE AMIN OF ANDROTT ISLAND DATED 05.01.2011
EXT. R1(c)	COPY OF THE SKETCH ALONG WITH THE DETAILS OF EACH OCCUPANTS PREPARED BY THE RESPONDENTS
EXT. R1(d)	COPY OF THE REPORT FURNISHED BY THE SDO ANDROTT
EXT. R1(e)	COPY OF THE TOTAL BPL LIST OF ANDROTT ISLAND DATED 12.04.2007
EXT. R5(a)	COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 7.10.2008
EXT. R5(b)	ORDER DATED 11.2.2010 IN C.C.C. 1530/09
EXT. R5(c)	REPORT OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 16.02.2009

/TRUE COPY/

P.A. TO JUDGE

DCS

V.CHITAMBARESH,J.

¶51

-------------------------------

¶52

W.P.(C) Nos. 18538/2010, 26169/2010,

¶53

27738/2010, 35361/2010 & 1421/2011

¶54

-------------------------------------

¶55

Dated this the 21^st day of November, 2013

¶56

J U D G M E N T

¶57

All these writ petitions are connected. I shall therefore refer to exhibits in W.P.(C). No. 26169/2010 for the sake of convenience.

¶58

The unauthorised occupation of Government land by trespassers in Androth Island falling under Lakshadweep Administration has been engaging the attention of this Court for long. A Division Bench of this Court by a common judgment dated 28.09.2006 in W.P.(C). No. 13237/2006 and connected cases directed the Lakshadweep Administration to take effective steps for evicting the trespassers after considering their entitlement for assignment if any. The Collector and Development Commissioner of Union Territory of Lakshadweep accordingly passed Ext. P6 order and the same concludes as follows:-

¶59

“VI. Findings:-

¶60

(1) It is clear from the submission of the SDO, Andrott that the appellants were not owners of the land. They were in

¶61

W.P.(C) Nos. 18538/2010, 26169/2010, 27738/2010, 35361/2010 & 1421/2011 2

¶62

unauthorised occupation of the land for which the notices for eviction was issued by the SDO.

¶63

(2) The occupants have built their premises, shops and residences on this encroached land. This has not been done with any permission from the Lakshadweep Administration. The appellants failed to produce any proof of authorization for such non-agricultural use of land.

¶64

(3) The land under occupation is largely used for commercial and residential purposes. Forty two numbers of appellants have utilised this land for both residential and commercial purposes, unauthorisedly.

¶65

(4) It is clear that Administration has neither granter allotments nor has been collecting any rent from the unauthorised occupants.

¶66

(5) The earlier offer of the Administration in 2004 to the occupants to produce either authorisation or business licences issued by the Administration did not lead to any production of proof to the Administration by the appellants.

¶67

(6) The public purposes for which the eviction is needed is for access from the Jetty to the main road and related developments in the surrounding areas for benefit to all the citizens at large. Hence there is priority and preeminence of public purpose for using the government land against the interest of a few encroachers.

¶68

VIII. Rehabilitation issues:-

¶69

Rehabilitation of the appellant is humanitarian grounds, in case the eviction is carried out. The learned counsel Advt. Udayabanu also felt that Rehabilitation of these persons on humanitarian grounds may be justifiable.

¶70

IX. Order:-

¶71

1. It is open for the Administration to locate an alternative area for rehabilitation for appellants who are largely

¶72

W.P.(C) Nos. 18538/2010, 26169/2010, 27738/2010, 35361/2010 & 1421/2011 3

¶73

poor citizens of the islands. Taking out the means of lively-hood from their hands may raise humanitarian concerns. It may be sorted out by appropriate developments of a alternate area for only poor appellants under expert guidance of Lakshadweep Administration.

¶74

1. The eviction could be carried out without payment of any compensation so that the plan of the administration in public interest can be implemented. Compensation for structures are to be paid, if rehabilitation is not accepted.

¶75

1. As the issues involve rehabilitation on humanitarian grounds, Rehabilitation may be carried out first, prior to the implementation of the eviction from land and undertaking further developments.”

¶76

The fact that the trespassers are conducting business and residing in the property belonging to the Government without obtaining permission from the Lakshadweep Administration is therefore evident. Such persons are liable to be evicted therefrom as per the provisions of the Laccadive, Minicoy and Amindivi Islands Land Revenue and Tenancy Regulation, 1965 also. Regulation 15 concerning the eviction of trespassers from the Government land is to the following effect:-

¶77

“Regulation 15(1):- Any person who occupies or continues to occupy any pandaram land without lawful authority shall be regarded as a trespasser and may be summarily evicted therefrom by

¶78

W.P.(C) Nos. 18538/2010, 26169/2010, 27738/2010, 35361/2010 & 1421/2011 4

¶79

the competent authority in the prescribed manner and any building or other construction erected or anything deposited on such land, if not removed within such reasonable time as such authority may, from time to time, fix for the purpose, shall be liable to be forfeited to the Government and to be disposed of in such manner as the competent authority may direct: Provided that the competent authority may, in lieu of ordering the forfeiture of any such building or other construction, order the demolition of the whole or any part thereof.”

¶80

The petitioners in W. P.(C). No. 26169/2010, W. P.(C). No. 18538/2010, W. P.(C). No. 35361/2010 and W. P.(C). No. 27738/2010 are more concerned with the rehabilitation in case of eviction. They assert that eviction has to follow rehabilitation and not vice versa particularly in the context of the finding in Ext. P6 order by the Collector and Development Commissioner. The petitioners point out that the Deputy Collector who is a subordinate officer to the Collector and Development Commissioner cannot pass Ext. P7 order directing eviction of the trespassers even before rehabilitation is done. The Lakshadweep Administration has filed a counter affidavit contending that only a few among the petitioners are entitled for rehabilitation and that all others own property of

¶81

W.P.(C) Nos. 18538/2010, 26169/2010, 27738/2010, 35361/2010 & 1421/2011 5

¶82

their own. The petitioners are few in number and the expanse of Androth Island is less than 5 Kms and not much time is required to identify the eligible persons and locate places for rehabilitation.

¶83

The petitioner in W.P.(C). No. 1421/2011 contends that the main jetty of the Androth Island is obstructed by the illegal structures put up by these trespassers. The fact that the trespassers have to be evicted with utmost expedition to facilitate the breakwater facility for the main jetty is beyond dispute. Such a facility is necessary to enable the passengers to embark and disembark from the ships and vessels nearing the Androth Island. The matter cannot brook any further delay in view of the fact that the eviction of trespassers is essential for development of breakwater facility and their occupation is unauthorised.

¶84

I direct respondents 1 to 4 in W.P.(C). No. 26169/2010 to complete the process of rehabilitation and eviction simultaneously within a time frame. Such simultaneous exercise is resorted to as otherwise any bickering as regards rehabilitation may delay the implementation of the breakwater facility in the main jetty of the Androth Island. The entire exercise shall be completed by

¶85

W.P.(C) Nos. 18538/2010, 26169/2010, 27738/2010, 35361/2010 & 1421/2011 6

¶86

the respondents 1 to 4 in W.P.(C). No.26169/2010 or or before

¶87

31.12.2013.

¶88

These writ petitions are disposed of. No costs.

¶89

Sd/-

¶90

V.CHITAMBARESH JUDGE

¶91

DCS

Badrudheen v. the Administrator

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Badrudheen v. the Administrator

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kerala State Road Transport Corporation Vs Y.David

John.K.T Vs Kerala State Financial Corporation

Nazar A.K. Vs the Managing Director, Ksfe Ltd.

V.Somasekharan Nair Vs the Authorised Officer,Canara Bank, Klm.

M/S.Talupula Engineering Company Vs the Commercial Tax Officer

Honey S Vs Union Bank of India