High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeDisposed with directions directing expeditious ...

Muhammed Abdurahiman v. Special Tahsildar (LR), Land Tribunal, Tirurangadi and Village Officer, Vengara Village

Case / Petition Number:WP(C).No.89 of 2021 (I)

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
Judgment Date
2021-01-18
Court Decision / Holding
Writ petition disposed by directing the Land Tribunal, Tirurangadi, to dispose of S.M.No.645/2020 strictly in accordance with law, following the directions issued by this Court in Narayanan Namboodiri (2018); no order as to costs.
Final Disposition
Disposed with directions directing expeditious disposal as per Narayanan Namboodiri guidelines; no costs.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Muhammed Abdurahiman

Respondents

  • Special Tahasildar (LR), Land Tribunal, Tirurangadi
  • Village Officer, Vengara Village

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Sri P.T. Sheejish

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Smt K. Ammini Kutty (Sr. Government Pleader)

Case Synopsis & Summary

This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by Muhammed Abdurahiman seeking mandamus to command the 1st respondent Special Tahasildar (LR) to consider and decide S.M.No.645/2020 pending before the Land Tribunal, Tirurangadi. The suo motu proceedings, initiated under Rule 5 of the Kerala Land Reforms (Vesting and Assignment) Rules, 1970, are 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 said Rules, in respect of 4.04 acres of land comprised in Re.Sy.No.375/5 of Vengara Village in Malappuram District. The petitioner, a 72-year-old senior citizen, relies on expeditious disposal of such applications. The Government Pleader points to a substantial pendency (over 2,100 cases) in the Land Tribunal. The Court recalls Narayanan Namboodiri v. The Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms) (2018) and notes directions emphasizing seniority-based disposal, processing of reports through Village Officers, and prioritizing senior citizens, with disposal timelines (six months for senior-citizen cases, 18 months for others). The Court ultimately directs the Land Tribunal to dispose of S.M.No.645/2020 strictly in accordance with law and Narayanan Namboodiri’s directions, disposing of the petition without 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 (Vesting and Assignment) Rules, 1970Rule 5 of the Kerala Land Reforms (Vesting and Assignment) Rules, 1970Article 226 of the Constitution of IndiaG.O.(P).No.09/2018/RD dated 22.02.2018

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

Petitioner submitted that he is a 72-year-old senior citizen and seeks expeditious disposal of S.M.No.645/2020; urges mandamus to ensure disposal in accordance with the directions for expeditious disposal, especially prioritizing senior citizens as laid down in the Narayanan Namboodiri decision.

Contentions of Respondents

Government Pleader argued the Land Tribunal has a heavy pendency (over 2,100 suo motu cases) and should follow established procedures and timelines; noted need for notices/communications and cooperation with village officers; argued for adherence to rules and statutory provisions.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Narayanan Namboodiri v. The Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms) and anotherW.P.(C)No.28398 of 2017 and connected casesPositiveThe decision is relied upon for expeditious disposal and priority to senior citizens; the present Court directs disposal in accordance with the Narayanan Namboodiri guidelines.

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 Muhammed Abdurahiman v. Special Tahsildar (LR), Land Tribunal, Tirurangadi and Village Officer, Vengara Village 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.89 OF 2021(I)** ## **PETITIONER:** **MUHAMMED ABDURAHIMAN AGED 72 YEARS S/O. MUHAMMED NAHA, AMBAYATHINGAL, CHALIYAM P.O., CHALIYAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.** **BY ADV. SRI.P.T.SHEEJISH** ## **RESPONDENTS:** **1 THE SPECIAL THAHSILDAR (LR), LAND TRIBUNAL, TIRURNAGADI, TIRURANGADI P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, KERALA-676306.** **2 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VENGARA VILLAGE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, KERALA676505.** ## **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.89 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 consider and dispose of S.M.No.645/2020 on the filed of the Land Tribunal, Tirurangadi, within a time limit to be fixed by this Court. The _suo motu_ proceedings initiated by the Land Tribunal, Tirurangadi 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 4.04 Ares of land comprised in Re.Sy.No.375/5 of Vengara Village in Malappuram District. 2. On 05.01.2021, 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 3 WP(C)No.89 of 2021 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.89 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.89 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.89 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, Vengara Village, the Land Tribunal, Tirurangadi initiated _suo motu_ proceedings as S.M.No.645/2020, as evidenced by Ext.P1 certificate dated 24.12.2020, 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 72 years. The learned Senior Government Pleader would point out that the total pendency of _suo motu_ proceedings in the Land Tribunal, Tirurangadi is 2192. 7 WP(C)No.89 of 2021 8. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides this Court finds that the Land Tribunal, Tirurangadi can be directed to dispose of S.M.No.645/2020 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, Tirurangadi, to dispose of S.M.No.645/2020, 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.89 of 2021 8 ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1** **THE TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF SUOMOTO PROCEEDINGS IN SM NO. 645/2020 DATED 24/12/2020.** ## **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL** **TRUE COPY** ## **P.A. TO JUDGE**