WP(C) NO. 9608 OF 2012

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL WEDNESDAY, THE 7[TH] DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 17TH JYAISHTA, 1945** ## **WP(C) NO. 9608 OF 2012** ## **PETITIONER/S:** 1 PUSHPANGADHAN AGED 76 YEARS S/O PARAMESWARAN NAIR RESIDING AT SREE KRISHNA VILASAM, VENGAALLOOR P.O, THODUPUZHA 2 ADDL P2 SUBADRA W/O LATE PUSHPANGADHAN, RESIDING AT SREEKRISHNA VILASAM, SHAPPUMPADY, VENGALLUR.P.O, THODUPUZHA-685584. ADDL. P2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 24-2-2022 IN IA 1/2022 IN WP(C) 9608/2012 3 ADDL P3 SHAJI KUMAR P S/O LATE PUSHPANGADHAN, RESIDING AT SREEKRISHNA VILASAM, SHAPPUMPADY, VENGALLUR.P.O, THODUPUZHA-685584. ADDL. P3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 24-2-2022 IN IA 1/2022 IN WP(C) 9608/2012 4 ADDL P4 MANOJ KUMAR S/O LATE PUSHPANGADHAN, RESIDING AT SREEKRISHNA VILASAM, SHAPPUMPADY, VENGALLUR.P.O, THODUPUZHA-685584. ADDL. P4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 24-2-2022 IN IA 1/2022 IN WP(C) 9608/2012 5 ADDL P5 VINOD P S/O LATE PUSHPANGADHAN, RESIDING AT SREEKRISHNA VILASAM, SHAPPUMPADY, VENGALLUR.P.O, THODUPUZHA-685584. ADDL. P5 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 24-2-2022 IN IA 1/2022 IN WP(C) 9608/2012 6 ADDL P6 RAJEEV PUSHPANGADHAN S/O LATE PUSHPANGADHAN, RESIDING AT SREEKRISHNA VILASAM, SHAPPUMPADY, VENGALLUR.P.O, THODUPUZHA-685584. ADDL. P6 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 24-2-2022 IN IA 1/2022 IN WP(C) 9608/2012 BY ADVS. SRI.S.ANANTHAKRISHNAN S.ANANTHAKRISHNAN SRI.N.K.SUBRAMANIAN **2** ## **WP(C) NO. 9608 OF 2012** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** 1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001 2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER IDUKKI PAINAVU 685603 3 THE TAHSILDAR THODUPUZHA 685584 BY ADVS. ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: **WP(C) NO. 9608 OF 2012** **3** ## **JUDGMENT** Petitioner since deceased represented by the LRs have sought the indulgence of this Court for issuance of directions to the respondents to pay the compensation in respect of land measuring 4.30 Ares of property in Sy.No.1244/9-5 Kuramangalam Village. For the purpose of widening of Vengallur-Mangattukavala four line road, had received a notice dated 8.7.2011 to surrender the property at free of cost which was replied by the petitioner that he was willing to do so and thereafter had objected to the same by objection dated 27.7.2011. Without following the procedure as prescribed under Section 4 of the Land Relinquishment Act, 1958 respondents have denied the compensation to the petitioner. It is in that background, petitioner has approached this Court. 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that as per the provisions of Section 4 of the Land Relinquishment Act, 1958, if the land owner surrenders the land for widening of the Panchayath land and submits a declaration form ie., not a requirement of law; there has to be an adjudication on the same and in the absence of the same, it would amount to violation of Article 300A and the respondent State is required to compensate **WP(C) NO. 9608 OF 2012** **4** the land owner and this fact has been admitted in paragraph 4 of the counter affidavit dated 3.7.2013. In support of the contentions relied upon the judgment of this Court in **Pallichal Grama Panchayat v. Lalithambika A and another (2009 (4) KHC 844** . 3. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader submitted that as per the averment in the second counter affidavit dated 31.3.2022, the property was situated in Municipal area of Kumaramangalam Village. As per the resurvey BTR the land involved in the said Sy.No.1244/9-5 is road and belongs to the Kerala Government. It was submitted that before finalization and implementation of resurvey records, the different notifications as contemplated under the Survey and Boundaries Act, 1961 were published. The notification under Section 6(1) of the said Act was published on 8.11.1977 inviting all persons having any interest in the land to attend either in person or by agent for the purpose of pointing out boundaries and supply information in connection therewith. Notice under Section 9(2) was duly published on 30.1.2018 and accordingly, notification under Section 13 of the said Act was also published on 3.9.2019. Petitioner did not raise any objection pursuant to the notifications. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and **WP(C) NO. 9608 OF 2012** **5** appraised the paper book. Section 4 of the Kerala Land Relinquishment Act, 1958 reads as under: 4. Procedure to be followed when lands are relinquished.-[(1) Where a registered holder or, a registered holder, cultivating tenant and intermediaries, if any, jointly intends or relinquish any land under Section 3, such registered holder or, as the case may be, such registered holder, cultivating tenant and intermediaries, if any jointly may submit an application in the prescribed form to "[the Revenue Divisional Officer of the Division in which the land is situate].] (2) On receipt of the application mentioned in sub-section (1) the "Revenue Divisional Officer) shall, if satisfied, after such enquiry as he thinks necessary, that "[the registered holder or as the case may be, the registered holder, the cultivating tenant and the intermediaries, if any, of the land jointly is or are competent to relinquish and has or have valid title in the land) issue a notice in the prescribed form to all such persons as he may consider interested in the land, calling upon them before a date specified in the notice to show cause why the relinquishment may not be accepted. (3) The Revenue Divisional Officer) shall, also affix a copy of the notice referred to in sub- section (2) on the notice board of his office and shall cause it to be published in such manner as may be prescribed in the village where the land is situate. (4) Any person interested in the land may, before the date specified in the notice, file an objection before the Revenue Divisional Officer) showing cause why the relinquishment should not be accepted. (5) When the period for filing objections is over, all objections received shall be enquired into by the "Revenue Divisional Officer) and he may pass orders either accepting or rejecting the application for relinquishment. (6) The Revenue Divisional Officer] may at any stage of the proceedings reject the application on any of the fallowing grounds, namely i) that the registered holder, or as the case may be, the registered holder, cultivating tenant and the intermediaries, if any, jointly, is not, or are not, competent to relinquish the land (ii) that the title of the registered holder, the tenant or the **WP(C) NO. 9608 OF 2012** **6** intermediaries, if any, is defective: (i) that there are arrears of land revenue due on the land; (v) that the land is not accessible except through land not belonging to the Government (V) such other grounds as may be prescribed]. 5. From the perusal of the aforementioned provisions, it is evident that a complete procedure has been prescribed to be followed when the lands are relinquished. Paragraph 4 of the counter affidavit of 2013 reads as under: 4. Under the above circumstances, it was not possible to include such surrendered lands under the Land Acquisition procedure. The work relating to surrender of land was being attended by the Village Office at Thodupuzha and Kumaramangalam, Thodupuzha Taluk and Revenue Divisional Office, Idukki and ordinarily it takes some time to finalize the procedure. Further there was no time to wait till the final decision of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Idukki in the above surrender proposal, otherwise the Land Acquisition will become denova and also this office has proceeded on the notion the surrender application filed by the land owner are in order and will be accepted by the Revenue Divisional Officer in due course. 6. From the perusal of the contents, it is evident that no such procedure was followed. In the absence of such procedure, it cannot be termed that the petitioner had actually relinquished the land and would not be entitled for compensation. Similar proposition has already been pondered by this Court in the judgment in **Pallichal Grama Panchayat v. Lalithambika A and another (2009 (4) KHC 844).** The operative part of the judgment **WP(C) NO. 9608 OF 2012** **7** reads thus: 7. It is pertinent to note that the relinquishment of the rights over the property can only be effected under the relevant provisions of the kerala Land Relinquishment Act, in accordance with the procedure under Section 4 therein. Even though Annexure-IV application was submitted by the concerned party before the Tribunal, it was for the Panchayat to have it forwarded to the competent authority to have it taken to a logical conclusion. The step taken by the Panchayat in this regard of the outcome are not discernible from any of the proceedings placed before this Court or before the Tribunal for Local SelfGovernmentInstitutions. 8. Another important aspect to be looked into is that the concerned person who preferred Annexure-IV application for relinquishment of the property has conveyed the entire extent of 8 cents to the children of the first respondent as per the Assignment Deed dated 31.08.2006. Absolutely nothing has been mentioned in the said deed as to the surrender of any portion of the above extent of land and on the other hand, the boundaries of the properties are clearly mentioned in the schedule given thereunder. In other words, the entire extent of the property stands conveyed to the transferees by virtue of said deed before the relinquishment sought to be made by Annexure-IV, came into effect. No residual rights or proceedings were left in favors of anybody, by the transferor. By virtue of the above conscious decision, all the rights and interests over the property enjoyed by the transferor stood transferred to the transferees for valid consideration and the transferees started to enjoy the same with absolute ownership, exclusive possession and with clear and marketable title. As such, the order passed by the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, Thiruvananthapuram, on the basis of the available pleadings and evidence placed before it, cannot be rendered as defective in any manner. This being the position, no interference is warranted in this Writ petition filed by the Panchyath. 9. In the above circumstances; this Court does not find any tenable ground to interfere. However, this will be without prejudice to the right of the Panchayth to proceed with further steps, if any, to approach the appropriate authorities for establishing the alleged relinquishment as having validly made and accepted and also without prejudice to the rights of the Panchayth, if they find it fit and proper to have the **WP(C) NO. 9608 OF 2012** **8** property acquired under the relevant provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. The challenge against Ext.P1 fails and the Writ petition is dismissed. The present writ petition is also covered in view of the aforementioned findings. It cannot be considered to be a relinquishment under the provisions of the Kerala Relinquishment Act, 1958. Accordingly, writ petition is allowed. Respondents are directed to pay the compensation of land aforementioned along with the statutory benefits with interest to the LRs of the petitioner as has been given to the similarly situated land owners within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. **SD/-** sab **AMIT RAWAL** **JUDGE** **WP(C) NO. 9608 OF 2012** **9** ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9608/2012** PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DT. 8.7.2011 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DT. 27.7.11 FILED BY THE PETITIONER RESPONDENT EXHIBITS EXHIBIT R3(a) A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 18.10.2011 IN W.A NO.1467/2011