IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 35371 of 2008(J)
1. M. ASSIYINAR,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
... Respondent
2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
3. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA),
For Petitioner :SRI.JAWAHAR JOSE
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Dated :11/02/2010
O R D E R
T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
W.P.(C). No.35371/2008-J
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dated this the 11th day of February, 2010
J U D G M E N T
Aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the
respondents in assigning the land in favour of the
petitioner as ordered in Ext.P1, this writ petition has
been filed.
2. The petitioner applied for assigning a total
extent of 25 cents of land in Re-survey Nos.58, 60 and
215/3 of Bare Village which according to him is in his
possession for the last fifty years. His claim was
originally rejected by the Assigning Authority as per order
dated 06/02/1989 and the appeal filed was confirmed by the
Appellate Authority, namely, the second respondent as per
order dated 07/09/1989. Finally, a revision petition was
filed before the first respondent-District Collector which
was allowed as per Ext.P1 order.
3. According to the petitioner, he has effected vast
and valuable improvements in the property also and seeking
for issuance of patta he has filed Ext.P2 application
before the first respondent.
4. The third respondent has filed a counter
affidavit. Circumstances leading to the non compliance of
Ext.P1 order passed by the District Collector have been
W.P.(C). No.35371/2008
-:2:-
detailed in the counter affidavit. It is averred in
paragraph (5) that the land in Re-survey Nos.215/3B is AW
which lies adjoining to PWD road. Hence, consent of the
PWD authorities is required. Besides, a mass petition from
the people of the locality objecting assignment of the land
is pending also. It is assured that action will be taken
in accordance with the prevailing KLA Act and Rules. A
small portion of AW is set apart for military persons.
5. In the light of Ext.P1 order passed by the
District Collector, there cannot be any dispute that the
revision has been allowed in favour of the petitioner. In
Ext.P1, the District Collector has ordered that the land
may be assigned to the encroacher after leaving sufficient
space to the road margin. Therefore, what is the extent of
land available for assigning to the petitioner is the
matter to be considered by the third respondent. As Ext.P1
has become final, the objection that a portion of the land
cannot be assigned at all, cannot be taken by the
respondents, as a ground to deny the assignment of the
available land.
6. Therefore, there will be a direction to the
respondents to complete the process and finalise the
W.P.(C). No.35371/2008
-:3:-
procedure for assignment as ordered in Ext.P1 within a
period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of
this Judgment, after hearing the petitioner.
The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.
(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)
ms