Dismissed¶¶45

Njanasekhar, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Mar 2025WP(C)/18172/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: Kerala Land Assignment (Regularisation of Occupations of Forest Lands prior to 01-01-1977) Special Rules, 1993; Rule 2(f) definition of land; Rule 5 occupation prior to 01.01.1977; Rule 6 assignment list publication and objections; Rule 7 enquiry and regularisation limited to 01.01.1977 occupation; Section 2, Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 concurrence; possession certificate Ext.P1 alleged fabricated; Resurvey Land Register; Scheduled Caste claimants; Chinnakanal Village Survey No.34/01; Idukki; landless tribals; WP(C) 18172 of 2019; dismissal; takeover of land by District Administration.

What did the court decide?

No relief to petitioners; writ petition dismissed and District Administration directed to take over the land immediately, it being earmarked for allotment to landless tribals. ¶¶45

Njanasekhar, Vs State of Kerala — Kerala HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief to petitioners; writ petition dismissed and District Administration directed to take over the land immediately, it being earmarked for allotment to landless tribals.

¶¶45

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners are eligible for assignment of the land in Survey No.34/01 of Chinnakannal Village under the Kerala Land Assignment (Regularisation of Occupations of Forest Lands prior to 01-01-1977) Special Rules, 1993. +2 more

¶¶25

Court's answer

There is no other mode of assignment of land under the Special Rules other than through preparation of the assignment list under Rule 6 and conduct of enquiry under Rule 7; if no claims or objections were raised when the list was prepared, no assignment of land can be claimed thereafter.

¶¶41

Ratio / Principle

Rule 7 of the Special Rules is intended only to regularise occupation of the land as on 01.01.1977 and not to regularise any occupation of land after 01.01.1977.

¶¶44

Key takeaways

Absolutely there is no material for the District Collector to hold that the petitioners were in occupation of the land prior to 01.01.1977, and in the absence of any objections or claim raised at the time of preparation of the assignment list, the writ petition has no merit and is dismissed.ratio¶¶45
The District Administration is directed to take over the land from the petitioners immediately, as the counter states that the land is earmarked for allotment to landless tribals.ratio¶¶46

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Kerala High Court (A. Muhamed Mustaque, J., for the Bench) dismissed a writ petition challenging the District Collector's Ext.P7 order refusing assignment of land in Survey No.34/01 of Chinnakannal Village under the Kerala Land Assignment (Regularisation of Occupations of Forest Lands prior to 01-01-1977) Special Rules, 1993. Held: assignment under the Special Rules can be claimed only through the assignment list published under Rule 6 and the enquiry under Rule 7; if no claims or objections were raised when the list was prepared, no assignment can be claimed thereafter; and Rule 7 regularises only occupation subsisting as on 01.01.1977, not any later occupation. The petitioners, who claimed Scheduled Caste status and relied on a 1992 Village Officer possession certificate (which the Government Pleader said appeared fabricated), were shown by the Resurvey Land Register to have had neither they nor their predecessors in occupation prior to 01.01.1977. The District Administration was directed to take over the land immediately, it being earmarked for allotment to landless tribals.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 20TH POUSHA, 1945

¶5

WP(C) NO. 18172 OF 2019

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

1 NJANASEKHAR,

¶8

AGED 51 YEARS

¶9

S/O.LATE JOSEPH @ KALIMUTHU, ESHWARI ILLAM, SINGUKANDAM
KARA, CHINNAKANAL VILLAGE, IDUKKI.

¶10

2 SELVARANI, AGED 46 YEARS

¶11

D/O.LATE JOSEPH @ KALIMUTHU, ESHWARI ILLAM, SINGUKANDAM
KARA, CHINNAKANAL VILLAGE.

¶12

BY ADVS.

¶13

A.X.VARGHESE

¶14

A.V.JOJO

¶15

RESPONDENT/S:

¶16

1STATE OF KERALA,
REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001.

¶17

2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI, PIN - 685 601.

¶18

3 THE TAHSILDAR, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK OFFICE, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685 554.

¶19

4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, CHINNAKANAL VILLAGE OFFICE, CHINNAKANAL, PIN - 685 618. BY ADV GOVERNMENT PLEADER, ADV.S.RENJITH

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
10.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

WP(C) NO. 18172 OF 2019

¶22

¶23

JUDGMENT Dated this the 10^th day of January, 2023

¶24

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE(J)

¶25

In this writ petition, the petitioners challenges
Ext.P7 order of District Collector, claiming assignment of
land under the Kerala Land Assignment (Regularisation of
Occupations of Forest Lands prior to 01-01-1977) Special
Rules, 1993 (hereinafter referred as “the Special Rules,
1993”). According to the petitioners, they belonged to
Scheduled Caste Community, having absolute possession of
the land in Survey No.34/01 of Chinnakannal Village. The
District Collector found that the petitioners are not
eligible for the above said land and also they are the
owners of another extent of 2.5 acres of land, which is
situated 500 meters away from the land in question. It is
further noted that neither the petitioners nor their
predecessors, were in occupation of the land prior to
01.01.1977, as per the Resurvey Land Register.

¶26

2.The petitioners placed reliance on the possession
certificate, marked as Ext.P1. The learned Government

¶27

¶28

WP(C) NO. 18172 OF 2019

¶29

Pleader submits that this possession certificate appears
to have been fabricated for the purpose of this case.

¶30

3.The Special Rules, 1993 has been framed by the
Government of Kerala for assignment, settlement and
regularisation of forest land under occupation prior to
01.01.1977. Rule 2(f) of the Special Rules, 1977 defines
the land as follows:

¶31

2. Definitions. -

¶32

(a) xxx

¶33

(b) xxx

¶34

(c) xxx

¶35

(d) xxx

¶36

(e) xxx

¶37

 (f)"Land" means the Forest land subjected to
joint verification as defined in sub-clause (e)
and Cardamom Hill Reserve land which are
converted for non-cardamom cultivation prior to
1-1-1977 in Idukki District which have been
transferred from Forest Department to Revenue
Department and covered in the Resurvey Records
and list of lands recommended to Government of
India for concurrence under Section 2 of the
Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 (Central Act 69
of 1980) but does not include lands in wild life

¶38

WP(C) NO. 18172 OF 2019

¶39

¶40

Sanctuaries.

¶41

4. Rule 5 of Special Rules, 1977 prescribes that
the assignee or his predecessor/successor – in –
interest should have been under occupation of land
prior to 01.01.1977. As mandated from Rule 6 of the
Special Rules, 1977, the assignment list of the land
will have been published and the objection will have
to be raised from the person interested in regard to
the regularisation of occupation by assignment on
registry of the land. It is to be noted that no
objection were raised by the petitioners or
predecessors-in-interest, when the assignment list was
published. This is the first occasion to verify the
nature of occupation of interest in the land. There
is no other mode of assignment of land prescribed
other than through preparation of assignment list as
preferable under Rule 6 of the Special Rules, 1977 and
by conducting enquiry as referred under Rule 7 of the
Special Rules, 1977. If no claims or objections were
raised, when the list is prepared, no assignment of
land can be claimed thereafter. It is to be noted
that the Rule 7 of the Special Rules, 1977 is intended

¶42

WP(C) NO. 18172 OF 2019

¶43

5

¶44

only to regularise the occupation of the land as on
01.01.1977 and not to regularise any occupation of
land after 01.01.1977.

¶45

In view of the fact that, absolutely there is no
material for the District Collector to hold that the
petitioners were in occupation of the land prior to
01.01.1977 and also in the absence of any objections
or claim raised at the time of preparation of land,
there is no merit in this writ petition and the writ
petition is accordingly dismissed.

¶46

The District Administration is directed to take
over the land from the petitioners immediately as it
is mentioned in the counter that this land is
earmarked for allotment to landless tribals.

¶47

Sd/-

¶48

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE Sd/SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, JUDGE

¶49

RK

¶50

WP(C) NO. 18172 OF 2019

¶51

¶52

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18172/2019

¶53

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶54

EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY
THE VILLAGE OFFICER, CHINNAKANAL DATED
22/8/1992.
EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD
DATED 8/10/1991.
EXHIBIT P3 AND
TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION CARDS.
P3(A)
EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT, OS 108/2003
DATED 10/4/2003.
EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
14/12/2005 IN O.S.108/2003 OF THE
MUNSIFF COURT, DEVIKULAM.
EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
11/2/2016 IN W.P.(C) 11699/2011.
EXHIBIT P7TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED
7/8/2016.

Njanasekhar, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Njanasekhar, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nettorkkottu Temple Advisory Committee Vs the Secretary, Travancore Devaswom Board

Cochin Devaswom Board Vs *Senior Deputy Director

Ajayakumar E.K. Vs Cochin Devaswom Board

The High Power Committee for Implementation of Sabarimala Master Plan Vs State of Kerala

Suo Motu Vs State of Kerala

Viswanathan Vs State of Kerala