Disposed

Sivasankaran N.K v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC25 Jul 2024WP(C)/29469/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought assignment of Government land; the Tahsildar directed them to restrict the extent applied for and surrender the excess. The High Court held the Tahsildar's role is limited and the Taluk Land Assignment Committee must decide the application.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; Tahsildar directed to place Ext.P3 application before the Taluk Land Assignment Committee, which shall consider Ext.P16 reply.

Sivasankaran N.K Vs State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH THURSDAY, THE 25^TH DAY OF JULY 2024 / 3RD SRAVANA, 1946

¶4

WP(C) NO. 29469 OF 2023

¶5

PETITIONERS:

¶6

1SIVASANKARAN N.K
AGED 73 YEARS
S/O KUNJUNNI, NEELAMPILLY HOUSE, CHITTILAPPILLY
P.O., CHITTILAPPILLY, THRISSUR DISTRICT,
PIN - 680551

¶7

2KUMARI
AGED 68 YEARS
W/O SIVASANKARAN N.K., NEELAMPILLY HOUSE,
CHITTILAPPILLY P.O., CHITTILAPPILLY, THRISSUR
DISTRICT,, PIN - 680551

¶8

BY ADV
ASOK KUMAR P. KODATH

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695001

¶11

2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR, FIRST FLOOR, CIVIL STATION, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR, KERALA - 680003

¶12

3 THE TAHSILDAR, THRISSUR, TALUK OFFICE, THRISSUR CHEMBUKKAVU, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680020

¶13

4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER CHITTILAPPILLY P.O., CHITTILAPPILLY, THRISSUR DISTRICT, THRISSUR, PIN - 680551 BY ADV SRI. M.H. HANIL KUMAR – SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 25.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

¶16

W.P.(C) NO.29469 OF 2023

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

The petitioners preferred Ext.P3 application for assignment of Government land in their favour before the 3^rd respondent. The 3^rd respondent, instead of considering the application in accordance with the Kerala Land Assignment Act, 1960 and the Kerala Land Assignment Rules, 1964, gave Ext.P15 communication to the petitioners to modify the application for assignment limiting the extent to 6.07 Ares for house site and also to submit consent letter surrendering the remaining area to the Government. It is challenging Ext.P15 communication, the petitioners have approached this Court.

¶19

I have heard Sri. Asok Kumar P. Kodath, the learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri. M. H. Hanilkumar, the learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents.

¶20

Rule 4 of the Kerala Land Assignment Rules, 1964 says that government lands may be assigned on registry for

¶21

¶22

W.P.(C) NO.29469 OF 2023

¶23

purposes of personal cultivation, house-sites and beneficial enjoyment of adjourning registered holdings.

¶24

Rule 12 of the Kerala Land Assignment Rules, 1964 deals with the enquiry to be held before considering an application for assigning the land. It says that the Tahsildar shall publish a notice under his signature inviting objections in writing from interested persons to the registry of land. Thereafter, the list of assignable lands is to be placed before the Taluk Land Assignment Committee for its recommendation and to be forwarded to the District Collector for approval. Sub Rule (3) of Rule 12 of Kerala Land Assignment Rules, 1964 says that the applications received for assignment on registry shall be duly enquired into by the Tahsildar and placed before the Taluk Land Assignment Committee for considering its merits.

¶25

Thus, it is the Taluk Land Assignment Committee which has to take a final decision on the application for assignment. The Tahsildar has a limited role to conduct the

¶26

¶27

W.P.(C) NO.29469 OF 2023

¶28

enquiry on the applications and place it before the Taluk Land Assignment Committee. Hence, the action on the part of the 3^rd respondent in directing the petitioners to modify the application for assignment limiting the extent to 6.07 Ares and also to submit consent letter surrendering the remaining area to the Government cannot be justified. The 3^rd respondent is directed to place Ext.P3 application before the Taluk Land Assignment Committee for further action. The Committee shall take into account Ext.P16 reply filed by the petitioners to Ext.P15.

¶29

The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

JUDGE

W.P.(C) NO.29469 OF 2023

¶36

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 29469/2023

¶37

PETITIONERS’ EXHIBITS
Exhibit P-1TRUE COPY OF THE OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE
NO. C1-3229/2014 DATED 13.05.2014 ISSUED
BY THE SECRETARY, ADAT GRAMA PANCHAYAT
Exhibit P- 2TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO. B3667080
DATED 20.03.2015
Exhibit P-3TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
19.12.2012 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P-4TRUE COPY OF THE CHECK-LIST REPORT DATED
19.12.2012
Exhibit P-5TRUE COPY OF THE MAHAZAR DATED
19.12.2012 PREPARED BY THE 4TH
RESPONDENTCHITTIILAPPILLYVILLAGE
OFFICER
Exhibit P-6TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH PREPARED BY THE
4TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P-7TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF BASIC TAX
REGISTER ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT ON
28.07.2018 PERTAINING TO SURVEY NO.264/4
OF CHITTILAPPILLY VILLAGE
Exhibit P- 8TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.
70537/7053624 DATED 17.05.2006
Exhibit P-9TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT IN WRIT
PETITION NO. 2012/2015
Exhibit P- 10TRUECOPYOFTHEG.O.(MS)
NO.111/2011/REV DATED 26.02.2011
Exhibit P-11TRUE COPY OF THE GAZETTE AS GO. (P) NO.
19/2017/LSGD DATED 28.03.2017 AS SRO NO.
158/2017
Exhibit P- 12TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 30.11.2017
Exhibit P-13TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. B2/71627/2008
DATED 05.06.2018 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P-14TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 31.01.2018
BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P-15TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27.06.2023
BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER

¶38

¶39

W.P.(C) NO.29469 OF 2023

¶40

`Exhibit P-16`	`TRUE COP` `SUBMITTED` `RESPONDEN`	`Y OF THE REPLY DATED 12.07.2023` `BY THE PETITIONERS TO THE 3RD` `T`
`Exhibit P-17`	`TRUE CO`	`PY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS`
	`HON'BLE`	`COURT IN KESAVA REDDIAR V.`
	`DISTRICT`	`COLLECTOR (1992 (1) KLT SN 13).`
`Exhibit P-18`	`TRUE CO`	`PY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS`
	`HON'BLE`	`COURT IN BHASKARAN PILLAI V.`
	`STATE OF`	`KERALA, 1991 (2) KLT 332.`

¶41

RESPONDENTS’ EXHIBITS: NIL

Sivasankaran N.K v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sivasankaran N.K v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.a.Ratheesh, Vs Central Bureau of Investigation

R. Chandrasekharan, Vs Central Bureau of Investigation

Lillikutty, Vs State of Kerala

Marykutty Vs National Highways Authority of India - NHAI

P.D.Jose., Vs State of Kerala

Ajeesh Vs Union of India