Petitioner challenged auction notice for usufructs of river puramboke land, asserting lack of dispute over clean property. Court held land vests with State; Panchayath cannot sell usufructs of State property.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE 2016/2ND ASHADHA, 1938
WP(C).No. 1025 of 2016 (C)
PETITIONER:
TULSI DEVELOPERS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR RAJESH M.G., S/O. GOPINATHAN NAIR, VIII/522 B, MAVELIPURAM, NEAR SUNRISE HOSPITAL, SEAPORT AIRPORT ROAD, KAKKANADU - 682 030.
BY ADV. SRI.K.L.JOSEPH
RESPONDENTS:
1. KARUMALOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KARUMALOOR P.O - 683 511.
2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ADDITIONAL IRRIGATION SUB DIVISION, ALUVA - 683 101.
3. TAHASILDAR PARAVUR TALUK, PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM - 683 513.
R1 BY ADV. SMT.A.K.PREETHA R1 BY ADV. SRI.C.ANIL KUMAR R2,R3 BY ADV. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 1025 of 2016 (C)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
P1 - A TRUE COPY OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT LAYOUT PERMIT FROM THE SENIOR TOWN PLANER, BEARING NO.C/2570/12KDS DT. 28.11.2012.
P2 - A TRUE COPY OF THE SEKTCH DT. 04.10.2013 PREPARED BY THE TALUK SURVEYOR
P3 - A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT 03.10.2013 ISSUED BY THE ADDITIONAL TAHASILDAR TO THE PETITIONER.
P4 - A TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH DT. 04.8.2014 PREPARED BY SURVEY SUPERINTENDENT.
P5 - A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DT.29.7.2015 BEARING NO. L8-70011/2013 ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR TO LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER.
P6 - A TRUE COPY OF THE AUCTION NOTICE DT. 31.12.2015 ISSUED BY THE PANCHAYATH.
P7 - A TRUE COPY OF LETTER DT. 06.1.2016 ISSUED BY OPPOSITION LEADER OF PANCHAYATH TO AEE.
P8 - A TRUE COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DT. 04.1.2016.
P9 - A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 07.1.2016 BEARING NO. A1-5/2007 ISSUED BY THE AEE IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
JJJ
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.
-----------------------------------------W.P.(C) No. 1025 of 2016 (C)
-----------------------------------------Dated: 23rd June, 2016
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is a Developer who asserts right over 1 hectares 90 Ares 89 Sq.meters of land in Sy. Nos.431/3A65, 431/3A1, 431/3A16, 116/30, 116/31, 116/29 and 116/28B of Karumaloor Village, Paravur Taluk. The petitioner was aggrieved with Ext.P6 notice issued by the Karumaloor Grama Panchayath, the respondent herein, for auctioning usufructs of 20 coconut trees, standing in the river puramboke, adjacent to the petitioner's property. The petitioner does not have any dispute with respect to the fact that the said land is a puramboke land, which he has admitted in paragraph 9 of the writ petition. The contention is that the puramboke land, lying adjacent to
W.P.(C) No. 1025/2016
-2-
the petitioner's property, was lying dirty and unhygienic and the petitioner ensured that the puramboke land is kept clean and hygienic. This does not create any right over the property which admittedly belongs to the State. The petitioners contention is also to the effect that the puramboke land vests with the revenue department, as has been found by the irrigation department at Ext.P9.
respondent Panchayath would submit that the petitioner admittedly has no right over the puramboke land. The learned Counsel for the petitioner also asserts that the petitioner had never exercised any right over the property, but, had only attempted to keep it neat and clean. In any event, the respondent Panchayat cannot sell the usufructs, since the land vests with the
W.P.(C) No. 1025/2016
-3-
Government, is the only contention. The prayer also is only to quash Ext.P6 auction notice on the above contention.
appearing for the respondents the river puramboke, on the promulgation of the Kerala Panchayath Raj Act, 1994 (for brevity 'Act'), vests with the local bodies and hence Ext.P9 cannot be relied upon. In such circumstance, there can be no interdiction of the auction attempted by the Panchayath. The further contention of keeping the property neat and clean need not be looked into at all, since it creates no right as such. The petitioner definitely cannot have any claim on the said property and in the writ petition the petitioner attempts to protect the interest of the revenue, which the petitioner has no locus to agitate.
W.P.(C) No. 1025/2016
-4-
The writ petition would stand dismissed. No Costs.
Sd/K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE
jjj 24/6/16
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Panchayath can auction usufructs of river puramboke land adjacent to petitioner's private property.
Tulsi Developers India Private Limited
Karumaloor Grama Panchayath
Assistant Executive Engineer
Tahasildar Paravur
K. Vinod Chandran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
