High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2021-10-25Disposed of by directing the District Collector...

Joseph T.T etc. v State of Kerala and Others (WP(C) Nos. 21531/2021; 21555/2021; 21644/2021; 21783/2021)

Case / Petition Number:WP(C) Nos. 21531/2021; 21555/2021; 21644/2021; 21783/2021

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: Devan Ramachandran
Judgment Date: 2021-10-25
Court Decision / Holding: 2nd respondent District Collector to consider the petitioners’ applications after affording them an opportunity of hearing and to pass appropriate orders expeditiously, but not later than three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment; merits of Ext. P3 and eligibility to be decided later.
Final Disposition: Disposed of by directing the District Collector to consider the applications after hearing and pass orders within three months; merits left open.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Joseph T.T.
Lisamma
Balan Nair.K
Pushpa
Joy K.P.
Leelamma
Shereena Jasmine
UmmER M.M.

Respondents

The State of Kerala represented by the Secretary, Department of Revenue, Government of Kerala
The District Collector, Wayand, Wayanad
The Deputy Collector(LR), Collectorate, Kalpetta
The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Sulthan Bathery
The Village Officer, Sulthan Bathery Village Office
Sri. Jaffer Khan, Sr. G.P.

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• RAFFEEKH.K

Counsels for Respondents

• Sri Jaffar Khan, Sr. G.P.

Case Synopsis & Summary

These writ petitions, heard together and disposed of by a common judgment, concern residents of Sulthan Bathery, Wayanad seeking assignment of land under the Assignment of Land in Municipal and Corporation Area Rules 1995. The petitioners contend that their applications for land allotment have remained pending for years and seek a direction to the District Collector to process them under the applicable Rules, possibly aided by Ext. P3 Government Order. The State’s Senior Government Pleader explains that Ext. P3 was issued invoking Rule 21 of the Rules but has been challenged; a related decision in C.C. Anil Kumar v. State of Kerala (W.P(C) No. 33638 of 2019) is cited to indicate that some were granted the benefits of Ext. P3, while others were not. The Court notes that the core issue is whether the petitioners are to be considered under the Rules and whether Ext. P3 should apply to them, a question to be resolved by the competent authority upon hearing. Consequently, the Court does not decide merits but directs the 2nd respondent District Collector to consider the petitioners’ applications after giving them an opportunity of hearing and to pass appropriate orders expeditiously, within three months from the copy of the judgment. The verdict leaves the merits open and subject to the outcome of future proceedings regarding Ext. P3.

Provisions of Law Cited

Assignment of Land in Municipal and Corporation Area Rules 1995Rule 21 of the Assignment of Land in Municipal and Corporation Area Rules 1995

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners seek assignment of land in Sulthan Bathery village under the 1995 Rules and rely on Ext. P3 Government Order. They contend that their applications have languished for years and urge that they be considered under the Rules, with the Ext. P3 benefit potentially applicable if permissible by law. They request a clear direction to process their applications and to pass appropriate orders expeditiously, with due opportunity of hearing before a decision is made, and without pre-emptively denying relief.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents submit that petitioners can be considered in terms of the Rules, and there is no legal impediment for the competent authority to act. However, Ext. P3’s applicability is contested since it was issued under Rule 21 and has been the subject of challenge; some others were granted the benefit, but the present petitioners cannot be automatically entitled pending the outcome of related litigation (notably the Anil Kumar matter). The court should hear the petitioners and decide according to law while leaving merits and eligibility to be resolved by the competent authority.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
C.C. Anil Kumar v. State of Kerala and Others	W.P(C) No.33638 of 2019	Mentioned Only	Cited as background regarding Ext.P3 and its challenge; the judgment does not adopt or distinguish it, but references it in the course of explaining the legal backdrop.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Joseph T.T etc. v State of Kerala and Others (WP(C) Nos. 21531/2021; 21555/2021; 21644/2021; 21783/2021) and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 25[TH] DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 3RD KARTHIKA, 1943** **WP(C) NO. 21531 OF 2021** ## **PETITIONERS:** 1 JOSEPH T.T AGED 59 YEARS THATTARADIYIL HOUSE, FAIR LAND, SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD PIN 673 592. 2 LISAMMA W/O. JOSEPH T.T., THATTARADIYIL HOUSE, FAIR LAND, SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD PIN 673 592. BY ADV RAFFEEKH.K ## **RESPONDENTS:** 1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695 001 2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WAYAND, KALPETTA NORTH POST, WAYANAD, PIN 673 122 3 THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR(LR) COLLECTORATE, KALPETTA NORTH POST, WAYANAD PIN 673 122 4 THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN 673 592 5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER SULTHAN BATHERY VILLAGE OFFICE, WAYANAD DISTRICT PIN 673 592 SRI.JAFFAR KHAN SR. G.P. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.10.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).21783/2021, 21644/2021 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: **WP(C)NO.21531/2021 & Con. Cases** **2** ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN** **MONDAY, THE 25[TH] DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 3RD KARTHIKA, 1943** **WP(C) NO. 21555 OF 2021** ## **PETITIONERS:** 1 BALAN NAIR.K KALATHINGAL HOUSE, FAIR LAND COLONY, SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYAND PIN 673 592 2 PUSHPA W/O. BALAN NAIR K, KALATHINGAL HOUSE, FAIR LAND COLONY, SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYAND PIN 673 592 BY ADV RAFFEEKH.K 1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN 695 001 2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WAYANAD, KALPETTA NORTH POST, WAYANAD PIN 673 122 3 THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR(LR) COLLECTORATE, KALPETTA NORTH POST, WAYANAD PIN 673 122 4 THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN 673 592 5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER SULTHAN BATHERY VILLAGE OFFICE, WAYANAD DISTRICT PIN 673 592 SRI.JAFFAR KHAN SR. G.P. ## **RESPONDENTS:** THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.10.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).21531/2021 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: **WP(C)NO.21531/2021 & Con. Cases** **3** ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 25[TH] DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 3RD KARTHIKA, 1943** **WP(C) NO. 21644 OF 2021** ## **PETITIONERS:** 1 JOY K.P KOLLAMKUDY HOUSE, FAIRLAND COLONY, SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD, PIN-673592. 2 LEELAMMA W/O JOY K.P., KOLLAMKUDY HOUSE, FAIRLAND COLONY, SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD, PIN-673592. BY ADV RAFFEEKH.K ## **RESPONDENTS:** 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001. 2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR WAYANAD, KALPETTA NORTH POST, WAYANAD, PIN-673122. 3 THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR(LR) COLLECTORATE, KALPETTA NORTH POST, WAYANAD, PIN-673122. 4 THE TAHSILDAR TALUK OFFICE, SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN-673592. 5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER SULTHAN BATHERY VILLAGE OFFICE, WAYANAD DISTRICT, **WP(C)NO.21531/2021 & Con. Cases** **4** PIN-673592. SRI.JAFFAR KHAN SR. G.P. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.10.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).21531/2021 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: **WP(C)NO.21531/2021 & Con. Cases** **5** ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 25[TH] DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 3RD KARTHIKA, 1943** ## **WP(C) NO. 21783 OF 2021** ## **PETITIONERS:** 1 SHEREENA JASMINE W/O UMMER M.M, VALLUVAKKATTIL HOUSE, FAIR LAND COLONY, SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD, PIN-673 592. 2 UMMER M.M, VALLUVAKKATTIL HOUSE, FAIR LAND COLONY, SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD, PIN-673 592. BY ADV RAFFEEKH.K 1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001. 2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WAYANAD, KALPETTA NORTH POST, WAYANAD, PIN-673 122. 3 THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LR), COLLECTORATE, KALPETTA NORTH POST, WAYANAD, PIN-673 122. 4 THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN-673 592. 5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER SULTHAN BATHERY VILLAGE OFFICE, WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN-673 592. SRI.JAFFAR KHAN SR. G.P. ## **RESPONDENTS:** THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.10.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).21531/2021 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: **WP(C)NO.21531/2021 & Con. Cases** **6** ## **JUDGMENT** The petitioners in these four cases - which have been heard together and are being disposed of jointly through this judgment - are similarly placed and they seek that the 2[nd] respondent be directed to assign them land in the Sulthan Bathery Village, as per the provisions of the Assignment of Land in Municipal and Corporation Area Rules 1995 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules' for short) as also Ext.P3 Government Order. 2. The petitioners allege that even though their applications for the afore purpose have been pending for the last several years, no action has been taken by the competent Authority on it until now; and therefore, that they be directed to do so, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. 3. The learned Senior Government Pleader, Shri.Jaffar Khan, submitted that if the petitioners only require their applications to be considered in terms of the Rules, there is no legal impediment for the competent Authority to do so. He, however, **WP(C)NO.21531/2021 & Con. Cases** ## **7** explained that the petitioners may not be able to seek the benefit of Ext.P3 Government Order because it was one which was issued, invoking the provisions of Rule 21 of the Rules, but that the same was under challenge before this Court which finally led to the judgment in _**C.C.Anil Kumar v. State of Kerala and Others [W.P(C)No.33638 of 2019]**_ . He submitted that, therefore, even though some others were given the benefit of Ext.P3, the petitioners cannot seek the same, after this Court had delivered affirmative declarations in the afore judgment. 4. I do not propose to go into the merits of the contentions of the learned Senior Government Pleader as afore, because as of now, the petitioners are only seeking that their applications be considered in terms of law. Whether Ext.P3 would be applicable to them or if they are eligible to the beneficial prescriptions thereunder, are matters which will have to be decided by the competent Authority when the petitioners are afforded an opportunity of being heard. **WP(C)NO.21531/2021 & Con. Cases** **8** Resultantly, I order these writ petitions and direct the 2[nd] respondent – District Collector, to consider the applications of the petitioners in these cases, after affording them an opportunity of being heard; thus culminating in an appropriate order thereon, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment . Needless to say, I have not considered the merits of the contentions of the rival parties on their merits and all of them are left open - including as to whether Ext.P3 would be applicable to the petitioners - to be decided by the 2[nd] respondent appropriately, while the afore exercise is completed. ## **Sd/-** ## **DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN** **JUDGE** **MC/25.10** **WP(C)NO.21531/2021 & Con. Cases** **9** ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21531/2021** PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 23-051995 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF G.O(MS) NO. 322/2010/REV DATED 04-08-2010 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O(MS) NO. 86/2019/REVENUE DATED 01-03-2019 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 2 NOTICE DATED 2201-2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. **WP(C)NO.21531/2021 & Con. Cases** ## **10** ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21555/2021** PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 18-052012 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF G.O(MS) NO. 322/2010/REV DATED 04-08-2010 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O(MS) NO. 86/2019/REVENUE DATED 01-03-2019 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 2 NOTICE DATED 2201-2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. **WP(C)NO.21531/2021 & Con. Cases** ## **11** ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21644/2021** PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 25.03.2000. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF GO(MS) NO.322/2010/REV DATED 04.08.2010. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE GO(MS) NO.86/2019/REVENUE DATED 01.03.2019. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 2 NOTICE DATED 22.01.2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. **WP(C)NO.21531/2021 & Con. Cases** ## **12** ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21783/2021** PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 20.4.2012 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF GO (MS) NO 322/2010/REV DATED 4.8.2010 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE GO(MS) NO 86/2019/REVENUE DATED 1.3.2019 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR ASSIGNMENT OF LAND ON REGISTRY AND ISSUANCE OF PATTA DATED 19.3.2019