High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeWrit petition disposed of

Moideenkutty v. The Land Tribunal Ottapalam and 2 others

Case / Petition Number:WP(C).No.3158 of 2021 (T)
Neutral Citation::null

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • Anil K. Narendran
Judgment Date
2021-02-08
Court Decision / Holding
The writ petition is disposed of by directing the Land Tribunal, Ottapalam, to dispose of S.M. No.1898/2019 strictly in accordance with law, following the directions issued by this Court in Narayanan Namboodiri v. The Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms) and another, cited supra.
Final Disposition
Writ petition disposed of

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Moideenkutty

Respondents

  • The Land Tribunal Ottapalam, Palakkad District represented by the Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms) Ottapalam
  • The Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms) Ottapalam, Taluk Office, Ottappalam, Palakkad District

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Sri. Jamsheed Hafiz
  • • Smt. K.K. Nesna

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Smt A.C. Vidhya

Case Synopsis & Summary

The petitioner, Moideenkutty, aged 72, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a mandamus to direct the 2nd respondent, the Special Tahasildar (Land Reforms), to conduct an expeditious inquiry and dispose of S.M.No.1898/2019 on the file of the Land Tribunal, Ottappalam. The matter concerns suo motu proceedings initiated by the Land Tribunal under Rule 5 of the Kerala Land Reforms (Vesting and Assignment) Rules, 1970, 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 a certificate of purchase under Section 72K read with Rule 14 of the Rules, in respect of about 93 cents of land described in Re.Sy.No.147/11, 148/1 and 148/6A of Ottappalam-I Village, Palakkad District. The petitioner is a senior citizen, and the Government Pleader notes a large pendency (2434) of suo motu proceedings. The Court relies on Narayanan Namboodiri v. The Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms) and another (W.P.(C).No.28398 of 2017) to urge expeditious disposal on seniority, and to accept Village Officer reports if needed. The Court directs disposal of S.M.No.1898/2019 strictly in accordance with that judgment, and disposes of the petition without costs.

Provisions of Law Cited

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

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner's counsel argued that the petitioner is a 72-year-old senior citizen and seeks mandamus for expeditious enquiry and disposal of S.M.No.1898/2019 before the Land Tribunal. The petitioner emphasized the urgency of timely processing of the purchase certificate under the Kerala Land Reforms framework, and urged adherence to the Court's prior directions (as in Narayanan Namboodiri) to avoid delay and to progress cases by seniority. The need to expedite, particularly for senior citizens, was stressed, with consideration of bank loan requirements and overall equity in hearing the cases in order of registration.

Contentions of Respondents

The Government Pleader pointed to substantial pendency in Ottapalam (2434 suo motu proceedings) and stressed adherence to seniority-based disposal, with potential reliance on Village Officers’ reports when Revenue Inspectors’ reports are unavailable. The respondents urged that the Land Tribunal follow the directions in Narayanan Namboodiri and ensure that notices to landowners are issued in an appropriate manner to avoid undue delay, while preserving the existing procedural safeguards and the maximum outer time frames (six months for senior citizens, 18 months for others) as highlighted in earlier pronouncements.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Narayanan Namboodiri v. The Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms) and anotherW.P.(C).No.28398 of 2017PositiveCourt relied on the earlier Narayanan Namboodiri decision for expeditious disposal and seniority-based processing, and to allow reports from Village Officers as needed.

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 Moideenkutty v. The Land Tribunal Ottapalam and 2 others 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 08TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 19TH MAGHA,1942** ## **WP(C).No.3158 OF 2021(T)** ## **PETITIONER/S:** **MOIDEENKUTTY, AGED 72 YEARS S/O. UNNEENKUTTY, KOLOTHUPARAMBIL, VARODE, OTTAPPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679 102** **BY ADVS. SRI.JAMSHEED HAFIZ SMT.K.K.NESNA** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** **1 THE LAND TRIBUNAL OTTAPALAM, PONNAI ROAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679 101, REPRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, (LAND REFORMS) OTTAPALAM** **2 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND REFORMS) OTTAPALAM, TALUK OFFICE, OTTAPPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679 104** ## **OTHER PRESENT:** ## **SMT A.C.VIDHYA- GOVERNMENT PLEADER** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** W.P(C).No.3158 OF 2021(T) -2- ## **JUDGMENT** The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 2[nd] respondent Special Tahasildar (LR) to conduct expeditious enquiry and to dispose of S.M.No.1898/2019 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 93 cents of land comprised in Re.Sy.No.147/11, 148/1 and 148/6A of Ottappalam-I Village in Palakkad District. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent. 3. In **Narayanan Namboodiri v. The Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms) and another** [Judgment dated W.P(C).No.3158 OF 2021(T) -3- 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. 4. 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 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 W.P(C).No.3158 OF 2021(T) -4- 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 reports through the Revenue Inspectors on account of their shortage, the Land Tribunal is free to get the reports from the Village Officers W.P(C).No.3158 OF 2021(T) -5- 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 passing orders as on today, the Land Tribunal shall pass orders within two months and the ## W.P(C).No.3158 OF 2021(T) -6- 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) 5. In the instant case, based on the report of the Village Officer, Ottappalam-I, the Land Tribunal, Ottapalam initiated _suo motu_ proceedings as S.M.No.1898/2019, as evidenced by Ext.P1 receipt dated 23.10.2019, 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. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner would point out that the petitioner is a senior citizen aged 72 years. The learned Government Pleader would point out that the total pendency of _suo motu_ proceedings in the Land Tribunal, Ottapalam is 2434. W.P(C).No.3158 OF 2021(T) -7- 7. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides this Court finds that the Land Tribunal, Ottapalam can be directed to dispose of S.M.No.1898/2019 following the directions issued by this Court in **Narayanan Namboodiri** , referred to supra. 8. In the result, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the Land Tribunal, Ottapalam, to dispose of S.M. No.1898/2019, 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.** bkn/- W.P(C).No.3158 OF 2021(T) -8- ## **APPENDIX** **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1** **A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 23.10.2019**