WP(C).No.25523/2019 (M) and WP(C).No.25586/2019 (W) – Ismail Konnola v. Land Tribunal (Land Reforms), Ottappalam & Special Deputy Tahsildar (Land Reforms), Land Tribunal Ottappalam; and Kunnath Maimoona v. Land Tribunal (Land Reforms), Tirur & Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms), Land Tribunal Tirur
Case Details & Bench
- Court
- High Court of Kerala
- Hon'ble Judges
- A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar
- Judgment Date
- 2019-09-25
- Court Decision / Holding
- Disposed of; directs that the suo motu cases shall be disposed by the Land Tribunal following the directions extracted from the 14.03.2018 judgment and GO 2018; petitioners to furnish copies of the writ petitions and the judgment to the Land Tribunal for further action.
- Final Disposition
- Disposed of
Parties to the Case
Appellants / Petitioners
- Ismail Konnola, S/O. Konnola Alavi Haji, Konnola House, Down Hill, Malappuram District
- Kunnath Maimoona, D/O. Kunheeth, Kunath House, Cherikuth, Kumminipparamb P.O., Malappuram District
Respondents
- LAND TRIBUNAL (LAND REFORMS), OTTAPPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT - 679 101
- SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (LAND REFORMS), LAND TRIBUNAL, OTTAPPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT - 679 101
- LAND TRIBUNAL, (LAND REFORMS) TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676 101
- SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND REFORMS), LAND TRIBUNAL, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676 101
Legal Representation & Advocates
Counsels for Petitioners
- • Sri. U.K. Devidas
Counsels for Respondents
- • Sri. S. Gopinathan, Sr. Government Pleader
Case Synopsis & Summary
These writ petitions seek expeditious disposal of suo motu proceedings numbered S.M.No.1553/2019 and S.M.No.1820/2019, pending before the Land Tribunals at Ottappalam and Tirur, Malappuram. The High Court recalls its 14 March 2018 directions issued in W.P. No. 28398/2017 and connected cases to streamline disposal by Land Tribunals: if reports from Revenue Inspectors are delayed due to shortages, tribunals may obtain reports from Village Officers; senior citizens’ matters must be disposed on seniority within six months; other cases must be disposed within the maximum outer limit of 18 months, subject to stays by higher authorities; parties should be allowed to take out notice to landowners by the tribunal’s chosen method, including publications; matters pending before Deputy Collector should follow the same procedure; tribunals should pass orders within two months where all steps are ripe for passing; and the GO 09/2018/RD will form part of judgment. Following cue from that judgment, the Court disposes these petitions by directing that the suo motu cases before the Land Tribunals shall be disposed in accordance with those directions. The petitioners are required to furnish a copy of the writ petition and the judgment to the Land Tribunal on production. The judgment references the Government Order and reiterates supervisory oversight to ensure prompt resolution. The appended exhibits show the petitions’ documents; no further reliefs are granted. The order emphasizes expeditious adjudication in land-reforms proceedings and integrates prior directives into the present disposal.
Provisions of Law Cited
Submissions & Arguments
Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners
The petitioners seek expeditious disposal of suo motu proceedings S.M.No.1553/2019 (Ottappalam) and S.M.No.1820/2019 (Tirur) before the Land Tribunals; they rely on this Court's 14.03.2018 judgment directing expeditious disposal, particularly prioritizing senior citizens’ matters and specifying timelines; they urge implementation of those directions and inclusion of GO 2018 in the judgment.
Contentions of Respondents
The respondents’ arguments are not explicitly detailed in the text; the High Court proceeds to apply the directions from the earlier judgment, indicating a preference for orderly, timely disposal under the existing framework and procedures.
Cited Precedents (1)
| Case Name | Citation | Treatment | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Writ Petition No.28398/2017 and connected cases | W.P.(C).No.28398/2017 | Positive | The 2018 judgment (W.P.28398/2017 and connected cases) is explicitly cited and its directions incorporated for expeditious disposal; the present decision relies on and applies those directives. |
Diagnostic Tool
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 WP(C).No.25523/2019 (M) and WP(C).No.25586/2019 (W) – Ismail Konnola v. Land Tribunal (Land Reforms), Ottappalam & Special Deputy Tahsildar (Land Reforms), Land Tribunal Ottappalam; and Kunnath Maimoona v. Land Tribunal (Land Reforms), Tirur & Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms), Land Tribunal Tirur and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.
Extracted Judgment Text
Exact text extracted from official judgment records.