SUDHAKARAN S.M. and others v. THE STATE OF KERALA and others

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM`** ``` THURSDAY, THE 17[TH] DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 26TH SRAVANA, ``` ## **`1945`** ## **`WP(C) NO. 7019 OF 2020`** ## **`PETITIONERS:`** |**`1`**|**`SUDHAKARAN S.M.,AGED 33 YEARS`**| |---|---| ||**`S/O.ENGAR MATHAN, MUNDAKADAVU,`**| ||**`PULIMUNDA COLONY, PADUKKA VANAM,`**| ||**`KARULAYI P.O., KARULAYI VILLAGE,`**| ||**`NIAMBUR TALUK,`**| ||**`MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 331.`**| |**`2`**|**`HARIDAS, AGED 49 YEARS`**| ||**`S/O.VALIYACHINNAN, MUNDAKADAVU,`**| ||**`PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY,`**| ||**`KARULAYI P.O.,NILAMBUR (VIA),`**| ||**`MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 331.`**| |**`3`**|**`AMBIKA, AGED 29 YEARS`**| ||**`D/O.SUNDARAN, MUNDAKADAVU,`**| ||**`PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY,`**| ||**`KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA),`**| ||**`MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 331.`**| |**`4`**|**`CHANDRIKA,AGED 45 YEARS`**| ||**`D/O.EANGAR MATHAN, MUNDAKADAVU,`**| ||**`PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY,`**| ||**`KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA),`**| ||**`MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 331.`**| |**`5`**|**`BINU,AGED 27 YEARS`**| ||**`S/O.SUNDARAN, MUNDAKADAVU,`**| ||**`PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY,`**| ||**`KARULAYI P.O.,NILAMBUR (VIA),`**| ||**`MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 331.`**| WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 2 - **`6 RAMESH, AGED 24 YEARS S/O.NEELAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 331.`** - **`7 NIRMALA, AGED 21 YEARS D/O.MANCHAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 331.`** - **`8 LEELA, AGED 55 YEARS D/O.KUTTIVELLAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 331.`** - **`9 SANTHOSH, AGED 28 YEARS S/O.CHATHAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 331.`** - **`10 PONNAMMA, AGED 57 YEARS D/O.BOMMAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`** - **`11 SATHI CHELLAN, AGED 45 YEARS D/O.CHATHAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`** - **`12 SATHEESH, AGED 24 YEARS S/O.CHELLAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`** WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 3 - **`13 MALLIKA, AGED 51 YEARS D/O.BOMMAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`** - **`14 KALAN, AGED 53 YEARS S/O.KARIYAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.`** - **`15 REETHUMOLE S., AGED 20 YEARS S/O.SUDHAKARAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`** - **`16 CHANDRABABU, AGED 26 YEARS S/O.VALIYACHINNAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`** ``` 17CHATHI,AGED 70 YEARS,D/O.BOMMAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330. ``` - **`18 SOUMYA, AGED 37 YEARS,D/O.MATHAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`** ``` 19MOHANDAS,AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.KARIYAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330. ``` WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 4 |**`20`**|**`MANJU S.,AGED 25 YEARS`**| |---|---| ||**`D/O.SOOJI MATHAN, MUNDAKADAVU,`**| ||**`PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY,`**| ||**`KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA),`**| ||**`MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`**| |**`21`**|**`MANJU K.,AGED 21 YEARS`**| ||**`D/O.KUNJUKUTTAN, MUNDAKADAVU,`**| ||**`PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY,`**| ||**`KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA),`**| ||**`MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`**| |**`22`**|**`KALAN POOCHAPPARA,AGED 65 YEARS`**| ||**`S/O.KOLLAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA,`**| ||**`MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O.,`**| ||**`NILAMBUR (VIA),`**| ||**`MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`**| |**`23`**|**`ANEESH, AGED 31 YEARS`**| ||**`S/O.KALAN POOCHAPPARA,`**| ||**`MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA,`**| ||**`MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O.,`**| ||**`NILAMBUR (VIA),`**| ||**`MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330`**| |**`24`**|**`SIVAN, AGED 40 YEARS`**| ||**`S/O.CHATHAN, MUNDAKADAVU,`**| ||**`PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY,`**| ||**`KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA),`**| ||**`MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`**| |**`25`**|**`SUNI, AGED 26 YEARS`**| ||**`S/O.SANKARAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA,`**| ||**`MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O.,`**| ||**`NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`**| |**`26`**|**`MANOJ, AGED 26 YEARS`**| ||**`S/O.MANCHAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA,`**| ||**`MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O.,`**| ||**`NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`**| |**`27`**|**`MANCHAN, AGED 55 YEARS`**| ||**`S/O.EANGAR MATHAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA,`**| WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 5 ||**`MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O.,`**| |---|---| ||**`NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`**| |**`28`**|**`KURUMBI,AGED 55 YEARS`**| ||**`D/O.VERIMATHAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA,`**| ||**`MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O.,`**| ||**`NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`**| |**`29`**|**`KUNGAN CHATHI, AGED 57 YEARS`**| ||**`D/O.CHATHI, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA,`**| ||**`MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O.,`**| ||**`NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`**| |**`30`**|**`PINKI SURESH, AGED 30 YEARS`**| ||**`D/O.KUNGAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA,`**| ||**`MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O.,`**| ||**`NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`**| |**`31`**|**`BALACHANDRAN, AGED 32 YEARS`**| ||**`S/O.CHATHAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA,`**| ||**`MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O.,`**| ||**`NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`**| |**`32`**|**`KRISHNACHANDRAN, AGED 31 YEARS`**| ||**`S/O.CHATHAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA,`**| ||**`MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O.,`**| ||**`NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`**| |**`33`**|**`NAYANA, AGED 30 YEARS`**| ||**`D/O.CHATHAN,MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA,`**| ||**`MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O.,`**| ||**`NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`**| |**`34`**|**`NEENU, AGED 30 YEARS`**| ||**`D/O.CHATHAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA,`**| ||**`MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O.,`**| ||**`NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`**| |**`35`**|**`ANIL, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.KARIYAN,`**| ||**`MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY,`**| ||**`KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA),`**| ||**`MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`**| WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 6 - **`36 CHATHAN, AGED 66 YEARS`** - **`S/O.KUNGAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`** - **`37 MADHAVAN,AGED 43 YEARS S/O.CHATHAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`** - **`38 RAJAN C.P., AGED 37 YEARS S/O.CHELLAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`** - **`39 BINDHU, AGED 35 YEARS D/O.CHATHAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`** - **`40 MENAKA, AGED 35 YEARS D/O.KUTTIVELLAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`** - **`41 SINDHU,AGED 30 YEARS D/O.NEELAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`** - **`42 MATHI,D/O.MATHAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`** - **`43 KRISHNAN, AGED 35 YEARS`** - **`S/O.CHELLAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA,`** WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 7 ``` ATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330. ``` - **`44 ANIMOLE, AGED 29 YEARS D/O.KRISHNAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`** - **`45 SANTHI, AGED 29 YEARS D/O.SUNDARAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`** - **`46 RATHEESH, AGED 24 YEARS S/O.NEELAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`** - **`47 SUMESH, AGED 22 YEARS S/O.NEELAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`** - **`48 BIJUMON N., AGED 21 YEARS S/O.NEELAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`** - **`49 CHANDRAN, AGED 40 YEARS`** - **`S/O.MATHAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA, MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330.`** - **`50 BABURAJ, AGED 35 YEARS`** - **`S/O.CHANDRA DAS, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA,`** - **`MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O.,`** WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 8 ``` NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 330. ``` ``` BY ADV C.DINESH ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** - **`1 THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.`** - **`2 SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FOREST DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.`** - **`3 THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, VAZHUTHAKKAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.`** - **`4 DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM, CIVIL STATION, MALAPPURAM - 676 505.`** - **`5 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PERINTHALMANNA, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, PERINTHALMANNA P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679 322.`** - **`6 DIVISIONAL FORST OFFICER (NORTH), DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICE, KALATHINKADAVU ROAD, MANALODY, NILAMBUR - 679 329, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.`** - **`7 KARULAYI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, GRAMA PANCHAYATH OFFICE, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR - 679 331,`** WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 9 ## **`MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.`** - **`8 SECRETARY, KARULAYI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KARULAYI GRAMA PANCHAYATH OFFICE, KARULAYI P.O, NILAMBUR - 679 331, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.`** - **`9 MATHANKUNNU GRAMASABHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KARULAYI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KARULAYI GRAMA PANCHAYATH OFFICE, KARULAYI P.O., NILAMBUR - 679 331, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.`** - **`10 MADHU,AGED 30 YEARS S/O.KRISHNAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O, NILAMBUR VIA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679 330.`** - **`11 KARIMBAN,AGED 50 YEARS S/O.MATHAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O, NILAMBUR (VIA) MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679330.`** - **`12 NEELAN, AGED 55 YEARS S/O.EANGAR, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O, NILAMBUR P.O, NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM-679 330`** - **`13 SREEKUMAR, AGED 40 YEARS`** - **`S/O.MATHAN, MUNDAKADAVU, PULIMUNDA MATHANKUNNU COLONY, KARULAYI P.O, NILAMBUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM-679 330`** - **`ADDL.R14 THE KERALA STATE LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY, NIYAMA SAHAYA BHAVAN, HIGH COURT COMPOUND, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 031.`** WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 10 ``` ADDL R14 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED ``` ``` 24-04-2023 IN WP(C) NO.7019/2020. ``` ``` BY ADVS. SPL.G.P. (FOREST) SRI T.P.SAJAN SRI.U.K.DEVIDAS D.AJITHKUMAR D T.MANASY(K/1628/2001) HARSHA S. NAIR(K/003325/1999) ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 11 ## **VIJU ABRAHAM, J.** **................................................................. W.P.(C) No.7019 of 2020 .................................................................** Dated this the 17[th] day of July, 2023 ## **JUDGMENT** “ _I have heard that you intend to settle us on a reservation near the mountains. I don't want to settle there. I love to roam over the wide prairie, and when I do it I feel free and happy; but, when we settle down we grow pale and die.”_ ## _Kiowa War Chief Satanta_ Averments in the writ petition in brief are as follows: Petitioners are members of the Scheduled Tribe community called Kattunayakan living in the dense forest of Pulimunda colony Karulayi Village comes under the Mathankunnu Forest Village of Malappuram District. The petitioners and their predecessors in interest were permanently residing in the aforesaid forest for time immemorial and are primarily depended on the forest for their basic needs. Hence they are entitled for all the protection guaranteed under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). Petitioners herein had in their possession and enjoyment and are under cultivation of approximately WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 12 more than 100 acres of land at Pulimunda colony varying from two to three acres for each individual family for their livelihood. Through their constant efforts and hard work they cultivated various agricultural crops like rice, tapioca, plantain, etc. in the above said land. Topographical feature of that region is extremely different from the forest land. Even now curry leaf, tamarind, etc. which were used by the petitioners can be seen in that land. The three boundaries of the above mentioned land are teak plantation and one boundary is dense forest. The marks, such as graveyard, remnants of huts, etc. showing the long and continuous inhabitance of petitioners and their predecessors are very well seen in the region. Meanwhile, the Government approached the petitioners and informed them about the threat of landslide and made them believe that the Government will provide better houses and other amenities to them under the Integrated Tribal Development Project (ITDP). In the guise of the threat of landslide the Government, in the year 2003, illegally evicted the petitioners from their permanent abode to Mundakadavu, which is a river puramboke situated nearly 6 kms. away from the original spot. Ext.P1 is the sketch showing the old and present location of the petitioners. However they continued the cultivation in the above mentioned land till 2007. Even now they are in possession of the above mentioned land. The petitioners stopped the cultivation due to the heavy WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 13 attack of the wild animals. Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act 2006”). It is submitted that the Act received the assent of the President on 29[th] December, 2006 and came into force on 2[nd] January, 2007. The Act guaranteed certain indispensable right and protection to the people who are originally residing in the forest and who were later evicted without protecting their interest or giving suitable alternative land . Section 3 of the Act recognized the right of forest dwelling scheduled tribes and other traditional forest dwellers on the forest land. Section 3(1) (m) explains "right to _in situ_ rehabilitation including alternative land in cases where the scheduled tribes or other traditional forest dwellers having illegally evicted or displaced from forest land of any description without receiving their legal entitlement to rehabilitation prior to 30[th] day of December, 2005". After evicting the petitioners from their houses at Pulimunda colony, they were compelled to live in temporary sheds near the river puramboke. Later the Government of Kerala sanctioned fund for the construction of 18 houses through the ITDP and accordingly after the construction of the houses the entire petitioners were confined to live in 18 houses. Due to the scarcity of space two or three families are forced to live in a single house. Meanwhile the Government has issued patta only to 18 persons among the petitioners who were residing there without WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 14 giving any logical reasoning or justification for excluding others. Ext.P2 dated 24.09.2009 is the copy of the sketch and extent of land assigned to those 18 persons. The procedure followed for the issuance of patta are completely against the statutory provisions contemplated under the Act. The pattas were issued without receiving any application from the claimants or any recommendation from either the Forest Right Committee or from the Grama Sabha and the land occupied by the petitioners at Pulimunda colony was also not measured. Later Government has constructed few more houses in the above mentioned land without assigning the land to any of the petitioners. Now the entire houses constructed under the lTDP have collapsed during the last year flood as is evident from Exts.P3(a) to P3(d) photographs. Since the petitioners lost their houses, they were forced to shift their residence from Mundakadavu colony to other place called Kanjirakadavu, since it is the only suitable place available to reside after the tragic flood. The petitioners have constructed temporary sheds and residing there with their infrastructure in a very pathetic situation as is evident from Exts.P4(a) to P4(c). They are deprived of even the basic need of a decent shelter to protect them from the nature. Hence the petitioners made Exts.P5 to P54 applications in From A under Rule 11(1)(a) of Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Rules, 2007 (hereinafter WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 15 referred to as the “Rules”) along with required documents through the Forest Right Committee to the Grama Sabha, which is the competent authority to initiate the process for determining the nature and extent of land which is to be allotted to the forest dwellers scheduled tribes or other traditional forest dwellers. 2. Petitioners were originally settled in Pulimunda Colony and their settlement was known in that name itself and finds a place in several records maintained by the Forest Department. In almost all the records concerned with the petitioners, their address is shown as Pulimunda Colony. The title for the forest land under occupation issued under the Rules produced as Exts.P5(6), survey map produced as Ext.P5(7), aadhar card produced as Ext.P5(8), ration card produced as Ext.P5(9) are some of such documents. Therefore the respondent cannot raise a contention that there was no settlement colony called Pulimunda. Petitioners relying on Exts.P55 and P56 would submit that the forest dwellers who were originally settled in Pulimunda were relocated at Mundakadavu and it is also admitted therein that at the time of resettlement they were not given any agricultural land but only provided with shelter. Petitioners submit that the primary challenge in this writ petition is regarding the resettlement of the petitioners by the authority from the original settlement at Pulimunda to Mundakadavu colony without WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 16 following the procedures prescribed under the Act and Rules framed thereunder. Section 3(1)(m) of the Act provides for the rehabilitation of the scheduled tribes and other traditional forest dwellers who are illegally evicted from the forest land prior to 13[th] December 2005 without giving their legal entitlement. As per Section 6(1) of the Act the Grama Sabha is the competent authority to determine the forest right of a forest dweller within the local limits of its jurisdiction including receiving claims, consolidating and verifying them and preparing maps, etc. Rule 12 A of the Rules provides a detailed procedure for the issuance of record of rights. It is submitted that none of the procedures prescribed either under the Act nor the Rules were followed. Hence the entire act pursuant to the issuance of a title of forest land to the 18 families among the petitioners are totally illegal and void since the same has been issued after coming in to force of the Act and the Rules. Petitioners relying on the judgments in _**State of Uttar Pradesh v. Sighara Singh and others (AIR 1964 SC 358), Babu Verghese v. Bar Council of Kerala ((999) 3 SCC 422)**_ and _**Taylor v. Taylor (1815 1 ch D 426, 431)**_ would submit that when the Act provides for a procedure to be followed in case of resettlement or alternative package, the same has to be strictly complied, or else it amounts to arbitrary exercise of power by the authorities and therefore, liable to be interfered by this Court. It is also submitted that a forest WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 17 dweller derives his rights over the forest emanates from his right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. 3. The petitioners submit that they are ready and willing to accept alternative land at Kanjirakadavu, to the same extent which they had occupied at Pulimunda colony, where they are now residing as it is the only suitable and safe land for residential purpose since there is a potential threat of land sliding at Pulimunda colony and threat of flood and soil erosion at Mundakadavu colony. Even though necessary applications were submitted in the month of August, 2019 till date the respondents have not taken any steps to conduct any inspection or survey or to prepare a sketch with regard to the extent of land occupied by the petitioners or any steps which are mandatory under the Act. In spite of approaching the authorities several times, the requests have been fallen on duff ears. The petitioners have a further case that in respect of 18 of the petitioners, the respondents have granted title for forest land under occupation for very small extent of land, whereas they were entitled to a larger extent of land as stipulated in the Act, 2006 and the Rules. Therefore they also sought for quashment of the title for forest land under occupation granted to them inasmuch as the same has not been granted in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules. Petitioners submit that they and their families are illiterate and they are living in the WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 18 forest with limited facilities and also they are in constant threat of natural calamities and hence they should be relocated to a safe place preferably at Kanjirakdavu where they are at present living and where the natural calamities are comparatively less. 4. A statement was filed by the 6[th] respondent on 24.11.2020 as directed by this Court wherein a specific contention has been raised that the averment of the petitioners that they were living at Pulimunda colony in Karulai Village is false inasmuch as no Pulimunda colony is seen in the Forest Department records. It is further submitted that they were living at Mundakadavu colony and had their record of rights issued under the Act. Petitioners were staying in the Mundakadavu colony with an extent of 4.32 hectors with record of rights and they started cultivation in the Mundakadavu colony on the available vacant space. Petitioners’ contention that they were cultivating in an area of about 100 acres is incorrect and there is no graveyard in the Mundakadavu colony. It is further submitted in the statement that the area described in Ext.P1 is far away from Mundakadavu colony and it is deep inside the forest and that a perusal of Ext.P1 would reveal that there is only Mundakadavu colony and no Pulimunda colony as contended by the petitioners. It is further submitted that record of rights was settled after completion of all procedures as prescribed in the Act, viz., Oorusabha, SDLC, DLC, etc. WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 19 and the petitioners are enjoying the record of rights and lived in the colony till 2019. It is admitted that during 2019, Mundakadavu colony collapsed due to natural calamity occurred on 7[th] to 9[th] of August 2019 and due to the same they were rehabilitated in temporary rehabilitation centre by the Forest Department and the district authorities. Later on as per Annexure-R6(a) decision taken by the Oorusabha of Mundakadavu colony on 02.09.2019 the entire families of Mundakadavu colony were decided to be shifted from the colony to a safer place as the area where they had record of rights is unsuitable for habitation and cultivation due to the 2019 natural calamity. Some of the colony members decided to go for a safer place called Vattikkal and other inmates of the colony decided to locate at Kanjirakadavu area. The proposal for swapping of Mundakadavu colony has been submitted to the Government. Now the process of cancelling of issued record of rights and proposal for new record of rights at the abovesaid places has been initiated without changing the extent of land already given to them. Whatever application that has been submitted by the petitioners will be processed based on their merits and according to the prevailing law and that the 6[th] respondent has already requested Karulai Panchayat authorities to conduct ooru sabha as early as possible. It is also further submitted that ooru sabha has already been convened and the applications submitted by the tribal people for record of rights will WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 20 be transmitted to Sub Divisional Level Committee and finally to the District Level Committee for approval. The District Level Committee will accept new claim for exact extent of land after extinguishing the record of rights which is already issued to them. Then this action will be informed to State and Central Government for final approval. The department is ready to give the exact extent of land occupied by the petitioners in Mundakadavu colony as a special case. It is further submitted that as per the decision of ooru sabha held on 02.09.2019, the Revenue Department has conducted survey and prepared a sketch of the proposed land for swapping. The extent of newly surveyed land at Vattikkal and Kanjirakkadavu is the same extent of land occupied by the petitioners at Mundakadavu colony previously. It is further submitted that Mundakadavu colony members have had individual rights to all eligible families during 2010-2013. As per the prevailing law, the settlement of individual rights is a onetime process and cannot be continued forever. The settlement of individual rights of the petitioners has been completed and they are not eligible for further settlement of individual rights. The Department is considering the swapping process as a separate case and this is the only way to settle the grievance of members of collapsed Mundakadavu colony. It is also admitted in the said statement that the tribal persons primarily depend on forest for their basic needs. There is no eviction of WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 21 the petitioners or their predecessors from the forest area as contended by the petitioners. The new claim now raised by the petitioners cannot be considered. 5. A subsequent statement dated 01.10.2021 was also filed by the 6[th] respondent wherein the contentions taken in the earlier statement were reiterated. It is contended on the strength of Section 4(3) of the Act, 2006 that as per the statutory provision the forest land can be assigned only with reference to the property in possession of the forest tribe and since the right of the petitioners were already settled at Mundakadavu colony based on the relevant provisions of the Act, 2006 for the forest land they had in their possession it cannot be extended to any other area of forest or they cannot claim additional forest area which was not in their possession as per the provisions of the Act. The 18 families among the petitioners to whom record of rights was issued were the inhabitants of Mundakadavu tribal settlement colony which is clearly stated in their application in Form A for record of rights which has been issued after complying with all the procedures as contemplated under the Act and the Rules. The statement further states that after obtaining the record of rights as per the provisions of the Act and the Rules they are now raising untenable contentions and objections which has not been taken before WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 22 the SDLC if they had any grievance or objection regarding the decision of the grama sabha. 6. I have heard the contentions of both sides. 7. The specific case of the petitioners is that they were in possession and enjoyment and under cultivation of approximately more than 100 acres of land at Pulimunda colony varying from two to three acres for each individual family for their livelihood. They have also cultivated various agricultural crops in the said land and the topographical feature of that region is extremely different from the forest land and that even now curry leaf, tamarind, etc. which were used by the petitioners could be seen in the said land. They further has a case that the three boundaries of the said land are teak plantation and one boundary is dense forest. The marks, such as graveyard, remnants of huts, etc. showing the long and continuous inhabitance of petitioners and their predecessors are very well seen in the region. Based on the said averments the petitioners would contend that the area which they were occupying earlier ie., Pulimunda colony could be identified without much difficulty because of these specifically demarcated identification marks. Through the ITDP has decided to provide better houses to the tribal people and the work was executed through private contractors, it is only for the convenience of the private contractors that the petitioners were shifted from their permanent WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 23 settlement at Pulimunda to Mundakadavu river puramboke without following the procedures prescribed under the Act 8. Admittedly even going by the case of the respondents only 18 among the petitioners were granted record of rights and it is seen that all these petitioners and their family were forced to stay in temporary sheds and later in 18 houses constructed through the ITDP. The contention of the petitioners that there is scarcity of space for two or three families to live in a single house is also not denied by the respondents in the counter affidavit. It is also seen that the record of right was issued only to 18 persons and most of the petitioners herein have been excluded without any justifiable reason. It is also admitted by the respondents that the entire houses constructed under the ITDP has collapsed in the last year’s flood and they are now living in a very pathetic situation as is evident from Ext.P4(a) to P4(c) photographs. The applications submitted by the petitioners are now pending consideration before the authorities concerned as is seen from the averments in the writ petition as well as which is admitted by the respondents in their statements. The specific contention of the petitioners is that the record of rights granted to 18 of the petitioners were without following the procedures as contemplated under the Act and the Rules framed thereunder. WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 24 9. Even though in the statement filed a specific contention has been raised that there exists no colony by name Pulimunda as per the Forest Department records, a perusal of Exts.P5(6) to P5(9) which are the documents issued by the Government will shows the address of the petitioners therein as Pulimunda colony. Therefore this Court is not able to accept the contention taken in the statement filed by the 6[th] respondent that there is no colony in existence by name Pulimunda. Further more one aspect to be taken into consideration is that the record of rights issued to 18 of the petitioners is seen issued as early as in 2011. Admittedly they are persons belonging to tribal community. They are permitted to settle in a place in 2011 and the records of rights have been given in respect of the said land, there can be no doubt of the fact that they have been shifted from a particular area in the forest. As per the case of the petitioners they were enjoying more than 100 acres in Pulimunda colony. Whether any such verification has been done before grant of record of rights in respect of 18 of the petitioners is also not discernible from the statement filed by the respondents except for the bare statement that the record of rights have been issued after complying with the due procedures as contemplated under the Act and the Rules. 10. Admittedly the petitioners have now been dispossessed from the property for which the record of rights have been granted to few of them WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 25 due to the recent floods and that they are now living in acute penury and serious difficulty. Even going by the case of the respondents, only 18 houses have been constructed through ITDP and the petitioners were forced to confine their life in those 18 houses. This Court is of the opinion that the details as given in paragraph 2 of the writ petition regarding their earlier settlement in Pulimunda colony has to be verified by the Government before issuance of record of rights based on the applications submitted by the petitioners. 11. The Scheduled Tribe and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 has been promulgated essentially to recognize and vest the forest rights and occupation in the forest land in forest dwelling scheduled tribes and other traditional forest dwellers who have been residing in such forests for generations but their rights could not be recorded and the Act was promulgated when it was found necessary to address the long standing insecurity and tenurial and access rights of forest dwelling tribes and other traditional forest dwellers including those who were forced to relocate their dwelling due to State development interventions. The said Act itself is a beneficial legislation in favour of the scheduled tribe community who are dwelling in the forests. Whatever steps taken under this Act shall also be taken in the best interest of the members of the scheduled tribe community who dwell in WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 26 the forest. As per Section 3(1)(m) of the Act, _in situ_ rehabilitation including alternative land in cases where the Scheduled Tribes and other traditional forest dwellers have been illegally evicted or displaced from forest land of any description without receiving their legal entitlement to rehabilitation prior to 13[th] December, 2005. Going by Section 4 of the Act the forest tribes recognized shall be in respect of the land under the occupation of an individual or family or community on the date of commencement of the Act and shall be restricted to the area under the actual occupation shall in no case exceed an area of four hectors. Going by the said provision of the Act which is recognized under Section 4(6) of the Act, the forest dwellers who have a recognized forest right in respect of the areas in their actual occupation and which shall not exceed four hectors. Therefore before issuing record of rights in respect of the forest land as per the said Act it is incumbent on the said authorities to verify and be satisfied as to the extent of land which was in possession of the tribal community prior to the issuance of record of rights inasmuch as the Act provides for forest right recognition in respect of areas under actual occupation. 12. The specific case of the petitioners is that none of the procedures as contemplated under the Act and the Rules were followed even at the time of issuance of record of rights in respect of 18 of the petitioners and that while considering the fresh application now pending before the WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 27 authorities strict procedures as contemplated as per the Act, 2006 and the Rules should be followed, especially the contention as to the extent of land which was in occupation of the petitioners in Pulimunda colony as claimed by the petitioners in paragraph 2 of the writ petition. The averments in the writ petition discloses a very pathetic situation of persons belonging to the tribal community. They were living in limited number of houses with limited facilities and even those meagre benefits have now been taken away in the recent floods which is admitted by the respondents also. They are living in a pathetic situation as is revealed from Ext.P5 series photographs. So their rehabilitation to a proper place without any much delay is the responsibility of the State Government. In this context, it is profitable to extract certain findings by the Apex Court in the judgment in _**Samatha v. State of A.P., (1997) 8 SCC 191**_ . _“10. Agriculture is the only source of livelihood for Scheduled Tribes, apart from collection and sale of minor forest produce to supplement their income. Land is their most important natural and valuable asset and imperishable endowment from which the tribals derive their sustenance, social status, economic and social equality, permanent place of abode and work and living. It is a security and source of economic empowerment. Therefore, the tribes too have great emotional attachment to their lands. The land on which they live and till, assures them equality of status and dignity of person and means to economic and social justice and is a potent weapon of economic empowerment in social democracy._ _xxxx xxxx_ _xxxx_ WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 28 _71. Thus, the Fifth and Sixth Schedules, an integral scheme of the Constitution with direction, philosophy and anxiety is to protect the tribals from exploitation and to preserve valuable endowment of their land for their economic empowerment to elongate social and economic democracy with liberty, equality, fraternity and dignity of their person in our political Bharat.”_ _xxxx xxxx xxxx_ _136. Tribals were the first settlers in this country but they were gradually pushed back into the forests and hills by subsequent settlers who were non-tribals. The forests and hills provided a natural barrier and isolated the tribals from the people living in the plains. On account of their isolation, they remained illiterate, uneducated, unsophisticated, poor and destitute and developed their own society where they allowed themselves to be governed by their own primitive and customary laws and rituals.”_ 13. In view of the pathetic living condition of the petitioners as is revealed from Ext.P4(a) to P4(d) photographs, this Court issued an order dated 24.7.2023 that in the Kerala State Legal services Authority, who are impleaded as additional respondent No.14 in the writ petition and also the District Collector, Malappuram to personally visit the site and filed their respective report. Pursuant to the same the Legal Services Authority has filed a memo producing the report submitted by the Malappuram District Legal Services Authority wherein it is reported that 36 families are living in Kanjirakkadavu Colony after they were shifted to the said place and their living in unhygenic surroundings and there is no bath room or toilet for their primary needs and all the families are living in insecurity. It is also WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 29 reported that the members of the said community are living in a shed constructed with bamboo or wooden poles and the roofs were covered with tarpaulin. It is further reported that the petitioners are not ready to shift Mundakkadavu Colony or Mathankunnu and they wish to stay in the present settlement area and requested to alloted the same extent of land allotted Mathankunnu with all infrastructure so that they could do their agricultural operations and to improve their livelihood and living condition. 14. The 4[th] respondent District Collector has also filed an affidavit as directed by this Court, the relevant portion of which is extracted as follows: _“3. It is submitted that on receipt of the order dated 24.7.2023 an urgent meeting of officials of Revenue Department, ITDP and Forest was convened on 29.7.2023. The meeting discussed the issue raised by the petitioners in detail and chalked out an action plan to resolve the issues of tribal people and measures to be taken for their welfare and it was decided to visit the colony on 01.08.23 with the officials of the departments concerned. As directed by the High Court, the colony was personally visited on 01.08.2023 along with Sub Collector, Perinthalmanna, Deputy Collector (Land Reforms), Deputy Collector (Disaster Management), Divisional Forest Officer, Nilambur South, District Medical Officer, Malappuram, District Supply Officer, Malappuram, Project Officer, ITDP, DD LSGD, Co-ordinator MGNREGA, Co-ordinator, Life Mission, Co-ordinator, Suchithwa Mission, EE KSER, representatives of Local bodies and other officials._ _4. It is submitted that the team visited the tribal settlements in two locations namely, Mundakkadavu and Kanjirakkadavu. The families of Pulimunda colony who were shifted from Mundakkadavu to_ ## WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 30 _Chembumkolli (Kanjirakkadavu) after 2019 floods are living in temporary shelters with roofs made of tarpaulin sheets. They have no proper toilet facilities and power supply. The families who returned to their houses in Mundakkadavu, after flood in 2019 are now living in small concrete houses with limited facilities._ _5. It is submitted that during the visit detailed meeting was held with the people in the colony and the following issues were noted and remedial measures were taken._ _(i) Dwelling Shelter : The following alternative options were suggested to the colony residents. They are:_ _a) House under Life Mission Scheme in the feasible location within the Taluk._ _b) Rental Houses at their willing place and_ _c) allotment of land for the land-less ST people within the same Taluk (Nilambur) where land is available._ _But they are not ready and expressed their unwillingness to move from their particular place wherein they presently dwell. They insisted that they need only the rights at the place where they dwell._ _ii) Drinking Water : Divisional Forest Officer was directed to ensure proper drinking water facility to the residents of the colony and take steps to clean the pond within two days and to make maintenance of the foundation of the water tank and other minor repairs._ _iii) Food grains: District Supply Officer, Project Officer, ITDP and Secretary, Karulai Grama Panchayath were directed to ensure sufficient food grains to the residents of the colony considering the fact that new sub families are formed in the existing ration cards._ _iv) Toilet facility: Divisional Forest Officer was directed to ensure proper toilet facility for each and every family. Project Officer, ITDP was directed to provide sufficient funds in this regard after getting approval in the appropriate Committee and allot the funds to Divisional Forest Officer._ _v) Health issues: DMO was directed to ensure availability of 108 ambulance service and Divisional forest officer was directed to make_ ## WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 31 _necessary arrangement to accompany the ambulance within the forest during night hours. NHM, DMO, JD-LSGD and PO-ITDP were directed to ensure implementation of “Gothra Graha” scheme. The scheme is for the benefit of the pregnant woman who is expecting to deliver her new baby shortly. They will be accommodated at a place near to the hospital with assistance of care taker, cook and vehicle assistance so that they can reach the health centre for delivery without delay._ _vi) Electricity: DFO, KSEB, ITDP and BSNL were directed to speed up the new electric line under the 4G saturation scheme. Divisional forest officer was directed to provide solar lanterns to all the residents._ _vii) Road: DFO informed that permission was granted by the forest department for concreting of road and JPC MRNREG was directed to ensure completion of the work based on the permission granted by DFO._ _viii) P S C coaching facility: Divisional Forest Officer, P O ITDP was directed to make necessary arrangements in IB Nedumkayam for conducting P S C coaching for eligible candidates in the colony in order to get job._ _6. It was directed the DFO Nilambur (South) and Sub collector Perinthalmanna to report the status of the 53 applications submitted by the tribal people for Forest Right as per Forest Right Act of 2006. Accordingly, Divisional Forest Officer and Sub Collector Perinthalmanna submitted the report. It is revealed from the reports that 53 tribal families applied for ROR for the land in Pulimunda colony wherein they are living at present, whose land was devastated during the flood in 2019 in Mundakkadavu Colony. As per the Forest Right Act 2006, ROR can be granted only for those who are having possession before 13[th] Dec 2005. But the applicants possess the land in Pulimunda colony 2019 onwards only. Section 4(3) of Scheduled Tribes and other forest dwellers (Recognition of Forest Right) Act 2006 says as follows:- “The recognition and vesting of forest right under this act to the forest dwelling scheduled tribes and to other traditional_ WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 32 _forest dwellers in relation to any state or union territory in respect of forest land and their habit shall be subject to the condition that such scheduled tribes or tribal communities or other traditional forest dwellers had occupied forest land before the 13[th] day of December 2005.”_ _All these 53 applications placed before SDLC and discussed, but the SDLC could not take actions on those applications because of the legal hindrance in Forest Right Act 2006._ _7. A direction has been given to the Tahsildar, Nilambur, PO ITDP, JD(LSGD) and Secretary, Karuali Grama Panchayath to make necessary steps to shift the people to a safer location at the time of heavy rain and natural calamity._ _It is most humbly submitted that earnest efforts have been taken to resolve the issues faced by the residents of the colony and departments concerned have been directed to ensure follow up actions in this regard.”_ 15. It is seen that pursuant to the direction issued, various steps have been taken by the District Collector, the 4[th] respondent to provide the petitioners a decent living. It is further ordered that whatever steps mentioned in the affidavit should be made available to the petitioners without any fail. The 4[th] respondent District Collector shall see that the officers under him including the District Tribal Welfare Officer to see that whatever facilities for decent life shall be provided to the petitioners without any fail, including a proper and safe shelter. Those petitioners who are willing to shift their residence to a place as stated in the affidavit under the head “Dwelling Shelter” must be shifted without any delay. If the WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 33 petitioners are unwilling to shift to these places, the existing sheds constructed by the petitioners should be temporarily modified and strengthened without any delay so that they will have a safe and healthy living. The 4[th] respondent shall call for periodic reports through the officers under him and monitor their living and health condition and shall take immediate steps to provide necessary facilities whenever necessary. 16. The tribals are the original owners of the land and they have constitutional right for having a living without any fear or exploitation and with an absolute right to enjoy rights over the forest land. In spite of the constitutional protection granted to the scheduled tribe communities and various schemes that have been implemented both by the State as well as the Central Governments Ext.P4 series of photographs will show the pathetic situation in which the tribals of the State are now living. It is quite unfortunate that their application for record of rights are pending from 2019 onwards and that they are living now in a very pathetic situation. Since they have every right as per law to obtain record of rights in respect of the land which was in their actual occupation it is absolutely necessary that the respondents shall take steps to find out the actual extent of land which was in their possession as claimed by them in Pulimunda tribal colony. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the application submitted by the petitioners should be considered de hors the extent of WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 34 land now given to 18 of the petitioners before this Court. Therefore the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: (i) The respondents shall verify and find out the exact extent of land in possession of the petitioners as specifically averred in paragraph 2 of the writ petition and it is only on the basis of the same that the applications submitted by the petitioners for issuance of record of rights should be considered. Such verification shall be done in the presence of the authorised representative of the 14[th] respondent. (ii) Exts.P6 to P54 applications submitted by the petitioners for issuance of record of rights shall be considered and decided strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 and the Rules framed thereunder. (iii) The 1[st] respondent Government should take a pragmatic stand in this matter and the respondents shall not take technical objections in the matter so that the actual land to which they are entitled to get record of rights be given to them. Since the applications have been pending from 2019 onwards, there will be a direction to the respondents to see that the procedure is completed at the earliest, at any rate within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 35 (iv) The directions in paragraph 15 of this judgment shall also be strictly complied with. With the abovesaid observations and directions, the above writ petition is disposed of. Registry to forward a copy of this judgment to the 1[st] respondent as well as the Additional Chief Secretary, Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe Development Department and also to the 4[th] respondent for strict compliance of the directions in the judgment. Sd/- **VIJU ABRAHAM JUDGE** cks WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 36 ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7019/2020`** ## `PETITIONER EXHIBITS` ``` EXHIBIT P1 ``` ``` TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH SHOWING THE OLD AND PRESENT LOCATION OF THE PETITIONERS. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH AND EXTENT OF LAND ASSIGNED TO THOSE 18 PERSONS DATED 24/9/2009. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P3 ``` ``` NIL. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P3(a)TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE PATHETIC SITUATION OF THE HOUSES. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P3(b)TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE PATHETIC SITUATION OF THE HOUSES. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P3(c)TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE PATHETIC SITUATION OF THE HOUSES. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P3(d)TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE PATHETIC SITUATION OF THE HOUSES. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P4NIL. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P4(a)TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE LIE AND LOCATION OF THE TEMPORARY SHED. ``` - `EXHIBIT P4(b) TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE LIE AND LOCATION OF THE TEMPORARY SHED.` ``` EXHIBIT P4(c)TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE LIE AND LOCATION OF THE TEMPORARY SHED. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE GRAMA SABHA ALONG WITH SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P7TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD PETITIONER. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P8 ``` ``` TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY ``` WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 37 ||`THE 4TH PETITIONER.`| |---|---| |`EXHIBIT P9`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 5TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P10`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 6TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P11`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 11TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P12`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 8TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P13`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 9TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P14`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 10TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P15`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 11TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P16`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 12TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P17`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 13TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P18`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 14TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P19`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 15TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P20`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 16TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P21`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 17TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P22`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 18TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P23`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 19TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P24`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 38 ||`THE 20TH PETITIONER.`| |---|---| |`EXHIBIT P25`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 21ST PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P26`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 22ND PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P27`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 23RD PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P28`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 24TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P29`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 25TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P30`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 26TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P31`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 27TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P32`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 28TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P33`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 29TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P34`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 30TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P35`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 31ST PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P36`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 32ND PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P37`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 33RD PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P38`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 34TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P39`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 35TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P40`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 39 ||`THE 36TH PETITIONER.`| |---|---| |`EXHIBIT P41`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 37TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P42`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 38TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P43`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 39TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P44`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 40TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P45`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 41ST PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P46`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 42ND PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P47`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 43RD PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P48`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 44TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P49`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 45TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P50`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 46TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P51`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 47TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P52`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 48TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P53`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 49TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXHIBIT P54`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY`| ||`THE 50TH PETITIONER.`| |`EXT.P55`|`THE INFORMATION OBTAINED UNDER THE RIGHT TO`| ||`INFORMATION ACT DATED 5.10.2019`| |`EXT.P56`|`TRUE COPY OF THE MAP`| |WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 40|WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 40| |---|---| |`EXT.P57`|`TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE FOR FOREST LAND`| ||`UNDER OCCUPATION ISSUED TO PETITIONER NO.1`| |`EXT.P57(a)`|`TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE FOR FOREST LAND`| ||`UNDER OCCUPATION ISSUED TO PETITIONER NO.22`| |`EXT.P57(b)`|`TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE FOR FOREST LAND`| ||`UNDER OCCUPATION ISSUED TO PETITIONER NO.24`| |`EXT.P57(c)`|`TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE FOR FOREST LAND`| ||`UNDER OCCUPATION ISSUED TO PETITIONER NO.25`| |`EXT.P57(d)`|`TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE FOR FOREST LAND`| ||`UNDER OCCUPATION ISSUED TO PETITIONER NO.27`| |`EXT.P57(e)`|`TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE FOR FOREST LAND`| ||`UNDER OCCUPATION ISSUED TO PETITIONER NO.29`| |`EXT.P57(f)`|`TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE FOR FOREST LAND`| ||`UNDER OCCUPATION ISSUED TO PETITIONER NO.31`| |`EXT.P57(g)`|`TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE FOR FOREST LAND`| ||`UNDER OCCUPATION ISSUED TO PETITIONER NO.32`| |`EXT.P57(h)`|`TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE FOR FOREST LAND`| ||`UNDER OCCUPATION ISSUED TO THE HUSBAND OF`| ||`PETITIONER NO.34`| |`EXT.P57(i)`|`TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE FOR FOREST LAND`| ||`UNDER OCCUPATION ISSUED TO PETITIONER NO.35`| |`EXT.P57(j)`|`TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE FOR FOREST LAND`| ||`UNDER OCCUPATION ISSUED TO PETITIONER NO.36`| |`EXT.P57(k)`|`TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE FOR FOREST LAND`| ||`UNDER OCCUPATION ISSUED TO PETITIONER NO.38`| |`EXT.P57(l)`|`TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE FOR FOREST LAND`| ||`UNDER OCCUPATION ISSUED TO THE HUSBAND OF`| ||`PETITIONER NO.39`| |`EXT.P57(m)`|`TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE FOR FOREST LAND`| ||`UNDER OCCUPATION ISSUED TO THE HUSBAND OF`| ||`PETITIONER NO.40`| |`EXT.P57(n)`|`TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE FOR FOREST LAND`| ||`UNDER OCCUPATION ISSUED TO THE HUSBAND OF`| WP(C) No.7019 of 2020 41 ``` PETITIONER NO.42 EXT.P57(o)TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE FOR FOREST LAND UNDER OCCUPATION ISSUED TO THE HUSBAND OF PETITIONER NO.45 EXT.P57(p)TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE FOR FOREST LAND UNDER OCCUPATION ISSUED TO PETITIONER NO.49 EXT.P57(q)TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE FOR FOREST LAND UNDER OCCUPATION ISSUED TO PETITIONER NO.50 ANNEXURE R6(a)TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF OORUSABHA DATED 02.09.2019 ```