Allowed

Noordheen v. the District Collector

Kerala HC16 Sept 2014WP(C)/22402/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that the petitioner's relinquishment of excess land over 2 hectares, recorded in Ext.P4, complies with the Kerala Restrictions on Transfer by and Restoration of Lands to Scheduled Tribes Act, 1999, directing respondents to demarcate and accept the relinquishment.

What did the court decide?

Respondents 2 and 3 directed to accept the petitioner's relinquishment of excess land and demarcate the 2 hectares within one month.

Noordheen Vs the District Collector — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2014/25TH BHADRA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 22402 of 2014 (A)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

NOORDHEEN, S/O.HYDROSE, ERAKKATH HOUSE, KODUNGALLUR P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 680 664.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH SMT.K.P.GEETHA MANI SRI.P.N.APPUKUTTAN SMT.ASWATHI APPUKUTTAN

¶9

RESPONDENTS:-

¶10

1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678 001.

¶11

2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, OTTAPPALAM REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE,

¶12

OTTAPPALAM, PIN - 679 101.

¶13

3. THE TAHSILDAR, MANNARKKAD TALUK OFFICE, MANNARKKAD,

¶14

PIN - 678 582.

¶15

R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. P.K.SANTHAMMA

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-09-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

sts

¶18

WP(C).No. 22402 of 2014 (A)

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶21

EXHIBIT P1. A TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT DATED 21.10.2010 TRANSFERRING AN EXTENT 231.20 ARES OF PROPERTY IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER.

¶22

EXHIBIT P2. A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.TLA.1204/87, 546/87 DATED 14.03.2011 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

¶23

EXHIBIT P3. A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM DATED 14.04.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 7(5) OF THE KERALA RESTRICTION ON TRANSFER BY AND RESTORATION OF LANDS TO SCHEDULED TRIBES ACT, 1999 BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶24

EXHIBIT P4. A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 31.07.2014 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO TEH FIRST RESPONDENT SEEKING TO WITHDRAW THE STATUTORY APPEAL AND TO IMPLEMENT EXHIBIT P2 ORDER.

¶25

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.S.TO.JUDGE

sts

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

¶30

¶31

W.P.(C).No. 22402 OF 2014

¶32

¶33

Dated this the 16th day of September , 2014

¶34

JUDGMENT

¶35

The petitioner has purchased 231.2 Ares of property situated at Agali as per Ext.P1. The above property originally belonged to Scheduled Tribes. After purchase of the property, the 2^nd respondentRevenue Divisional Officer has issued Ext.P2 order under the Kerala Restriction on Transfer by and Restoration of Lands to Scheduled Tribes Act, 1999 directing the petitioner to restore the land purchased by him in excess of 2 hectares. Challenging the above order, the petitioner preferred Ext.P3 statutory appeal before the 1^st respondent-District Collector. Thereafter, as per Ext.P4, the petitioner has accepted Ext.P2 order passed by the 2^nd respondent. The petitioner now relinquished his claim in respect of land in excess of 2 hectares. Ext.P4 clearly indicates relinquishment made by the petitioner regarding the land in excess of 2 hectares. The petitioner has approached this Court on account of non implementation of Ext.P2 in spite of relinquishment made by the petitioner before the

¶36

W.P.(c).No.22402 of 2014 : 2 :

¶37

1^st respondent.

¶38

Having considered the petitioner's request as per Ext.P4 and also after hearing the learned special Government Pleader, I am of the view that Ext.P4 is in consistence with the Kerala Restriction on Transfer by and Restoration of Lands to Scheduled Tribes Act. The petitioner's relinquishment of excess land over and above two hectares has been recorded. In view of relinquishment of his claim for land in excess of 2 hectares, there will be a direction to respondents 2 and 3 to accept Ext.P4 and take necessary steps to demarcate the land in excess 2 hectares. Needful shall be done within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶39

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, Judge.

¶42

dpk

¶43

/True copy/ PS to Judge.

Noordheen v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Noordheen v. the District Collector

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

Basid (Minor) Vs Mr.K.C.Sanu

Pramod K. Vs the District Level Authorisation

K.M. John Vs State of Kerala

A.K.George Vs Retail Assets and Small Medium Enterprises City Credit Centre

T.A. Salim Vs State of Kerala

K.v.Damodaran Nair Vs the Chief Manager, State Bank of India