IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
CRP No. 780 of 2000(H)
1. CHERUVIL KADER HAJI
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :22/11/2007
O R D E R
K.T.SANKARAN, J.
--------------------------------------------
C.R.P. NO. 780 OF 2000
--------------------------------------------
Dated this the 22nd day of November, 2007
O R D E R
Originally the case was before the Taluk Land Board, Tirur. The
final order dated 7.9.1990 was passed, by which the declarant was
directed to surrender an extent of 2.04 acres of land. Challenging the
order passed by the Board, dated 7.9.1990, the declarant filed
C.R.P.No.434 of 1991. The order passed by the Taluk Land Board was
set aside as per order, dated 9.9.1997, and the case was remanded to
the Taluk Land Board. It was contended before this Court by the
declarant that as per the draft statement the total extent of land in the
possession of the declarant was shown as 32.04 acres equivalent to
28.98 = standard acres. The draft statement suggested that the ceiling
area applicable to the family was ten standard acres, which worked out to
13.01 > acres. The declarant was directed to surrender an extemt of
19.02 < acres. After considering the objections filed by the declarant, the
Taluk Land Board passed the final order, dated 7.9.1990, wherein it was
found that the total extent held by the family of the declarant was 14.04
acres equivalent to 12.84 standard acres. It was held that the declarant
is entitled to retain an area of 12 acres and he was directed to surrender
an extent of 2.04 acres. It was pointed out before this Court in
C.R.P.No.434 of 1991 that while disposing of the various objections, the
C.R.P. NO.780 OF 2000
:: 2 ::
Taluk Land Board had directed the deletion of an extent of 19 acres and
69.25 cents, which was clear from the order of the Taluk Land Board itself
and, therefore, there was no justification for arriving at the conclusion that
the declarant was holding an extent of 14.04 acres. This contention was
dealt with by this Court in C.R.P.No.434 of 1991 and it was held as
follows:
“3. According to the revision petitioners, there is
mistake in calculation of the extent of land, which is admitted
by the Government pleader. The total extent according to
the Taluk Land Board in the possession of the petitioners is
32.04 acres. The Taluk Land Board has exempted 19.06 <
acres. The remaining extent will only be 32.04 – 19.06 acres.”
After holding thus and after dealing with certain other objections, this
Court thought it fit to direct the Taluk Land Board to look into the matter
again and to arrive at a conclusion as to whether there was a mistake in
calculation.
2. After disposal of C.R.P.No.434 of 1991, the Taluk Land Board
passed an order, dated 26.9.1998. The declarant filed C.R.P.No.2187 of
1998 challenging that order. That Revision was disposed of on the short
ground that the term of the members of the Taluk Land Board expired on
20.8.1998 and, therefore, the order passed on 26.9.1998 by a Board
which was not in existence was null and void.
C.R.P. NO.780 OF 2000
:: 3 ::
3. After the order in C.R.P.No.2187 of 1998, the matter was
considered by the Taluk Land Board, Tirurangadi, to which the case was
transferred and the present order, dated 9.2.2000, was passed. As per
this order, the Taluk Land Board found that the declarant is liable to
surrender one acre and quarter cents. This finding was arrived at on the
basis that the total extent held by the declarant is 13.60 < acres = 12.00
< standard acres. It was held that the family of the declarant could retain
only ten standard acres, equivalent to 12.15 ordinary acres and as such,
the declarant is liable to surrender an extent of 1.00 < ordinary cents.
Even in this calculation there is a mistake. The Taluk Land Board held
that the total extent is 13.00 < acres and that the family of the declarant
could retain 12.15 ordinary acres. Then how the extent of land to be
surrendered be fixed at 1.00 < ordinary ares?
4. Apart from the above mistake, the Taluk Land Board has
completely ignored the order in C.R.P.No.434 of 1991. In spite of the
specific direction in C.R.P.No.2187 of 1998 that the Taluk Land Board
shall dispose of the case in the light of the order in C.R.P.No.434 of 1991,
the Taluk Land Board failed to discharge its function as a statutory forum.
The specific directions issued by this Court were not considered at all. I
must say that the Taluk Land Board was not justified at all in not
considering the case in accordance with the directions issued by this
C.R.P. NO.780 OF 2000
:: 4 ::
Court. It is true that the Taluk Land Board could decide a case on the
merits in its own way. But, when a Revision is filed under Section 103 of
the Kerala Land Reforms Act and the revisional court issued certain
directions, it is incumbent upon the Taluk Land Board to dispose of the
matter following the directions issued by the revisional court. The Taluk
Land Board cannot ignore those directions and decide the case as it likes.
Judicial discipline demands that an order passed by the superior court in
the hierarchy of Courts should be respected, obeyed and implemented. It
is unfortunate that the Taluk Land Board has not only committed grave
mistakes but also conveniently ignored the directions issued by this Court
earlier. I have no other option, but to set aside the order passed by the
Taluk Land Board and direct the Taluk Land Board to dispose of the
matter afresh in the light of the specific directions issued by this Court in
C.R.P.Nos.434 of 1991 and 2187 of 1998.
The Civil Revision Petition is, therefore, allowed, the impugned
order passed by the Taluk Land Board is set aside and the matter is
remanded to the Taluk Land Board for fresh disposal in the manner
indicated above.
(K.T.SANKARAN)
Judge
ahz/
K.T.SANKARAN, J.
——————————————-
——————————————-
C.R.P.NO. 780 OF 2000
O R D E R
22nd November, 2007
——————————————-