IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 28907 of 2008(N)
1. C.N. SANKARA KURUP,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
... Respondent
2. THE TAHSILDAR,
3. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (L.C UNIT)
For Petitioner :SRI.MOHAN C.MENON
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI
Dated :03/10/2008
O R D E R
V.GIRI,J.
-------------------------
W.P ( C) No.28907 of 2008
--------------------------
Dated this the 3rd October, 2008
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner challenges Exhibit-P17 proceedings of the
Special Tahasildar under the Land Conservancy Act
requiring him to be evicted from the land having an
extent of 4 cents in Sy. No.112/1 of the Maradu village.
According to the petitioner, he came into occupation of
the land during 1960 and the land was Government
poramboke but lying near a temple coming under the
Cochin Devaswom Board. An application for assignment
of the said land in favour of the petitioner is pending
before the second respondent. Exhibit-P8 will show that
the Village Officer and Revenue Inspector had visited the
land in the occupation of the petitioner and had
recommended the assignment of the land in favour of the
petitioner. They had also treated the land as Government
poramboke. Apparently, final orders under the Land
Assignment Act are yet to be passed. It is in the
W.P ( C) No.28907 of 2008
2
meanwhile, that proceedings under the Land Conservancy
Act was initiated on the premise that land is Devaswom
poramboke and not Government poramboke as such. In the
meanwhile, petitioner had converted his hut which is
originally situated into the property into a regular building,
property tax was paid and he has been in continuous
possession and enjoyment of the same. He has availed
electric connection to the building in the property as also
water connection. Charges have been paid.
2. Exhibit-P17 order is appealable under Section 16
of the Land Conservancy Act before the concerned Revenue
Divisional Officer. It is open to the petitioner to avail the
same.
3. In the facts and circumstances of the case and to
enable the petitioner to avail the same, further proceedings
pursuant to Exhibit-P17 and P18 shall be kept in abeyance
for a period of six months from today. In the meanwhile, if
the petitioner files an appeal against Exhibit-P17 within a
period of one month from today, the competent authority
shall dispose of the same, after hearing the petitioner or a
W.P ( C) No.28907 of 2008
3
representative, within a period of four months from the date
on which the appeal is filed. There will be a further
direction to the second respondent to pass final orders on
the petitioner’s application for assignment of the land
mentioned in Exhibit-P1 under the provisions of the Land
Assignment Act and the rules thereunder in the light of
Exhibit-P8 Mahazar and report as such, within a period of
four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment.
A copy of this judgment along with copy of the writ
petition shall be independently produced by the petitioner
before the Revenue Divisional Officer as well as the second
respondent.
(V.GIRI,JUDGE)
ma
W.P ( C) No.28907 of 2008
4
W.P ( C) No.28907 of 2008
5