High Court Kerala High Court

Kuttappan vs State Of Kerala on 27 January, 2011

Kerala High Court
Kuttappan vs State Of Kerala on 27 January, 2011
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 12070 of 2009(C)


1. KUTTAPPAN, PULICKAL HOUSE,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SECRETARY
                       ...       Respondent

2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR,

3. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.BABU KUMAR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :27/01/2011

 O R D E R
                       ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

             ```````````````````````````````````````````````````````
                 W.P.(C) No. 12070 of 2009 C
             ```````````````````````````````````````````````````````
           Dated this the 27th day of January, 2011

                            J U D G M E N T

Petitioner is the owner of 2.5 acres of land in

Poonjar Vadakkekara village. During 1984-85, petitioner was

the licensee of certain toddy shops. Default led to recovery

proceedings and finally, the aforesaid property of the

petitioner was sold in revenue recovery proceedings and

Government purchased the land. Subsequently, availing of

the benefit of an Amnesty scheme, petitioner settled the

liability. In this writ petition, what the petitioner contends is

that since he has settled the liability and as revenue recovery

proceedings have been withdrawn as per Ext.P4, the property

should be re-conveyed to him, giving the benefit of Ext.P5

Government Order.

2. However, as rightly pointed out by the learned

Government Pleader, petitioner has no case that the Amnesty

scheme under which the liability has been settled, enables the

W.P.(C) No.12070/2009
: 2 :

petitioner to claim re-conveyance of the property. In that

view of the matter, the issue raised by the counsel for the

petitioner is fully covered against him by the Division Bench

judgment of this Court in State of Kerala Vs. George Jacob

[2010 (3) KHC 381], wherein it has been held that

reconveyance can be claimed only if Amnesty scheme

provides for re-conveyance. In this case, admittedly there is

no such provision in the Amnesty Scheme, the benefit of

which was availed by the petitioner. Therefore, the issue is

covered against the petitioner and the writ petition is to be

rejected.

Writ petition fails and it is dismissed.

Sd/-

(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)
aks

// True Copy //

P.A. To Judge