High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeDisposed of; writ petition allowed in part with...

KAALU v. THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR (LAND REFORMS) AND THE VILLAGE OFFICER

Case / Petition Number:WP(C).No.503 OF 2021(K)

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • ANIL K. NARENDRAN
Judgment Date
2021-01-18
Court Decision / Holding
Writ petition disposed of; Land Tribunal, Ottappalam, directed to dispose of S.M.No.1688/2019 strictly in accordance with law, following the directions issued by this Court in Narayanan Namboodiri v. The Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms) and another, as supra. No order as to costs.
Final Disposition
Disposed of; writ petition allowed in part with directions to dispose S.M. No.1688/2019 in accordance with law and Narayanan Namboodiri directions; No order as to costs.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • KAALU (Petitioner)

Respondents

  • The Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms), Office of the Special Tahsildar (LR), Mini Civil Station, Ottappalam
  • The Village Officer, Lakkidi Perrur-II Village, Ottapalam Taluk, Palakkad District

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Sri. K. Ravi (Pariyarath)

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Sm t K. Amminikutty (Senior Government Pleader)

Case Synopsis & Summary

The petitioner, a senior citizen aged 61, seeks a mandamus under Article 226 to compel the Special Tahsildar (LR) to complete proceedings in S.M. No.1688/2019 before the Land Tribunal, Ottappalam. The suo motu action, initiated under Rule 5 of the Kerala Land Reforms (Vesting and Assignment) Rules, 1970, aims at vesting and transferring the landlord's rights to the Government under Section 72 and to issue a certificate of purchase under Section 72K read with Rule 14, in respect of 0.0120 hectares of land at Re.Sy.No.153/6 in Block 88, Lakkidi Perrur-II Village, Ottappalam Taluk. The petitioner challenges delay and seeks expedited disposal. The Government Pleader counters that the Land Tribunal's pendency is substantial (2434 cases) and that directions given by this Court in Narayanan Namboodiri v. Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms) guide expeditious disposal, especially for senior citizens. The court recalls Narayanan Namboodiri's directions: obtain reports through Village Officers if needed; prioritize senior citizens (six-month disposal) and apply seniority-based timelines for other cases (maximum 18 months); ensure service of notices by flexible means; and integrate GO 9/2018 with the judgment. The court ultimately disposes of the petition by directing the Land Tribunal to dispose of S.M.1688/2019 strictly in accordance with law and the Narayanan Namboodiri directions, without awarding costs.

Provisions of Law Cited

Article 226 of the Constitution of IndiaSection 72 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963Section 72K of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963Rule 14 of the Kerala Land Reforms Rules, 1970Rule 5 of the Kerala Land Reforms (Vesting and Assignment) Rules, 1970G.O.(P).No.09/2018/RD dated 22.02.2018Section 99 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Seniority of cases based on registration (seniority principle) in Land Tribunal disposal
  • Expeditious disposal of cases, especially those filed by senior citizens
  • Disposal within six months for senior citizens and within the maximum outer limit of 18 months for other cases, subject to higher authorities' orders
  • Cooperation of applicants in serving notices and flexibility in notice publication

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner urged the court to issue a mandamus directing the Special Tahsildar (LR) to complete the proceedings in S.M. No.1688/2019 before the Land Tribunal, arguing the senior citizen status warrants expeditious disposal and that the suo motu action should progress in accordance with law without delay.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents contended that the Land Tribunal is burdened with a large pendency; the court should follow Narayanan Namboodiri's directions for expeditious disposal and allow obtaining necessary reports from Village Officers; they emphasised adherence to due process and time limits established by the Court.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Narayanan Namboodiri v. The Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms) and anotherW.P.(C) No.28398 of 2017 and connected casesPositiveThe judgment relied on Narayanan Namboodiri to lay down directions for expeditious disposal and adherence to seniority in Land Tribunal proceedings.

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 KAALU v. THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR (LAND REFORMS) AND THE VILLAGE OFFICER 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 ANIL K.NARENDRAN** **MONDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 28TH POUSHA, 1942** ## **WP(C).No.503 OF 2021(K)** ## **PETITIONER:** **KAALU AGED 61 YEARS W/O.VELAYUDHAN, CHATHANANKUNDU HOUSE, LAKKIDI PERRUR-II, OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN679301.** **BY ADV. SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH)** ## **RESPONDENTS:** **1 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, (LAND REFORMS) OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (L.R), MINI CIVIL STATION, OTTAPPALAM, PIN-679104. 2 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, LAKKIDI PERRUR-II VILLAGE, OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-679301.** ## **SMT K.AMMINIKUTTY-SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** WP(C)No.503 of 2021 2 ## **JUDGMENT** The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 1[st] respondent Special Tahasildar (LR) to complete the proceedings in S.M.No.1688/2019 on the file of the Land Tribunal, Ottappalam, within a time limit to be fixed by this Court. The _suo motu_ proceedings initiated by the Land Tribunal, Ottappalam under Rule 5 of the Kerala Land Reforms (Vesting and Assignment) Rules, 1970, is one for assignment of the right, title and interest of the landlord vested in the Government under Section 72 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 and for issuance of certificate of purchase under Section 72K of the said Act, read with Rule 14 of the said Rules, in respect of 0.0120 Hectares of land comprised in Re.Sy.No.153/6 in Block No.88 of Lakkidi Perrur-II Village in Ottappalam Taluk, Palakkad District. 2. On 08.01.2021, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Government Pleader was directed to get instructions. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the WP(C)No.503 of 2021 3 respondents. 4. In **Narayanan Namboodiri v. The Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms) and another** [Judgment dated 14.03.2018 in W.P.(C)No.28398 of 2017 and connected cases] this Court noticed that in the writ petitions seeking expeditious disposal of the applications pending before the Land Tribunal for obtaining purchase certificate, many of the petitioners realised the need for purchase certificate only when they approached the Bank to obtain a loan. Filing writ petitions seeking expeditious disposal of the applications pending before the Land Tribunal is a routine affair before this Court. Breaking the queue by directing the Land Tribunals to dispose of the cases out of turn would result in derailing the process of disposal of the cases pending before the Tribunal. Therefore, the Land Tribunal is bound to dispose the cases in accordance with the seniority of registration of such cases. 5. In **Narayanan Namboodiri** , this Court noticed that by G.O.(P).No.09/2018/RD dated 22.02.2018 the Government of Kerala appointed the Village Officers coming within the WP(C)No.503 of 2021 4 jurisdiction of each Land Tribunal constituted under Section 99 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 for bringing to the notice of the Land Tribunal concerned any fact or information required by the Land Tribunal or for moving that Tribunal to take any action necessary for the implementation of the provisions of the said Act. Therefore, there may not be any difficulty to obtain the reports through the Village Officers concerned. Before this Court, the Government in principle agreed for speedy disposal of the cases filed by the senior citizens and addressed all the Land Tribunals to give priority to such cases. This Court noticed that in some of the cases, delay occurred on account of serving notice on the landlords, which can be averted if the applicant in such cases co-operate with the Land Tribunal in taking out notice to such persons. On consideration of the facts and circumstances, this Court disposed of those writ petitions with certain directions. Paragraph 2 of the said judgment reads thus; “2. On consideration of the facts and circumstances as above, this Court is of the view that the following directions can be issued for expeditious disposal of the cases by the Land Tribunal: (i) If it is felt that there is delay in obtaining WP(C)No.503 of 2021 5 reports through the Revenue Inspectors on account of their shortage, the Land Tribunal is free to get the reports from the Village Officers concerned. It is the discretion of the Land Tribunal in what manner such reports should be obtained. - (ii) Utmost importance should be given for expeditious disposal of all the cases filed by the senior citizens. The Land Tribunal shall dispose such cases of senior citizens on seniority basis within six months. - (iii) In respect of all other cases, the Land Tribunal shall follow the seniority of such cases and dispose the same within the maximum outer limit of 18 months unless there is a stay passed by the higher authorities. The Land Tribunal shall not break the seniority of such cases except for any directions being issued by this Court or any higher authority. - (iv) The parties are given liberty to take out notice to the land owners in such a manner in which the Land Tribunal deems fit to do so, including publications. - (v) In respect of the matters which are pending before the Deputy Collector, he shall follow the same procedure as mentioned above. - (vi) In respect of the proceedings in which all the steps have been completed which are ripe for WP(C)No.503 of 2021 6 passing orders as on today, the Land Tribunal shall pass orders within two months and the directions issued in earlier paragraphs would not affect those matters. However, in all other cases, the directions shall be strictly followed. (vii) The Government order, G.O.(P).No.09/2018/ RD, dated 22.02.2018 will form part of this Judgment.” (underline supplied) 6. In the instant case, based on the report of the Village Officer, Lakkidi Perrur-II Village, the Land Tribunal, Ottappalam initiated _suo motu_ proceedings as S.M.No.1688/2019, as evidenced by Ext.P2 receipt dated 18.09.2019, for assignment of the right, title and interest of the landlord vested in the Government under Section 72 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 and for issuance of certificate of purchase under Section 72K of the said Act, read with Rule 14 of the said Rules, in respect of the property referred to hereinbefore. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner would point out that the petitioner is a senior citizen aged 61 years. The learned Senior Government Pleader would point out that the total pendency of _suo motu_ proceedings in the Land Tribunal, Ottappalam is 2434. WP(C)No.503 of 2021 7 8. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides this Court finds that the Land Tribunal, Ottappalam can be directed to dispose of S.M.No.1688/2019 following the directions issued by this Court in **Narayanan Namboodiri** , referred to supra. 9. In the result, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the Land Tribunal, Ottappalam, to dispose of S.M.No.1688/2019, strictly in accordance with law, following the directions issued by this Court in paragraph 2 of the judgment in **Narayanan Namboodiri** , referred to supra. No order as to costs. Sd/- **ANIL K. NARENDRAN JUDGE** **yd** WP(C)No.503 of 2021 8 ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER IN RESPECT OF AN EXTENT OF 0.0120 HECTARES OF LAND, BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED NIL. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT EVIDENCING INITIATION OF S.M.PROCEEDINGS AS S.M.NO.1688/19, DATED 18.09.2019. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT RENDERED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT, IN W.P. (C)NO.28398/2017 & CONNECTED CASES, DATED 14.03.2018. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD ISSUED BY THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA, DATED 12.11.1998.** ## **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL** **TRUE COPY** ## **P.A. TO JUDGE**