IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 19702 of 2009(G)
1. MALLIKA W/O. PARAMESWARAN NAIR,
... Petitioner
2. MEGHANATHAN M,
3. VYASAN M,
4. BHRATHAN, S/O. PARAMESWARAN,
Vs
1. THE TAHSILDAR, MANNARKKAD,
... Respondent
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
3. THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER,
4. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY
For Petitioner :SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI
Dated :18/08/2009
O R D E R
V.GIRI, J.
----------------------------------------
W.P.(C).No.19702 of 2009
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 18th day of August, 2009.
JUDGMENT
The petitioners are the legal heirs of one
K.R.Parameswaran Nair, who is stated to have acquired
a land having an extent of 10 acres in Survey No.2019
of Agaly Village from its original jenmi one Moopil Nair
in the year 1960. Parameswaran Nair had obtained
registration under the Cardamom Rules and is stated to
have cultivated the property with Cardamom. He died
on 30.4.2006. According to the petitioners, they belong
to Hindu Mudukka community, which is recognised as a
scheduled tribe.
2. The forest officials had trespassed into the
property and tried to demarcate the same. The
petitioners have objected to it and they claim that they
are entitled to the protection under the Scheduled
Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers
(Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006. This writ
W.P.(C).No.19702/09
:: 2 ::
petition has been filed essentially praying for a
direction to the respondents to take appropriate action
to see that the rights of the petitioners as Scheduled
Tribes, are recognised under the Act.
3. A detailed counter affidavit has been filed
by the respondents. It is, inter alia, contended that the
petitioners have no right to contend that they are the
legal heirs of Parameswaran Niar and hence the
disputed property shall be assigned to them. It is
further contended that they are not Scheduled Tribes
and they are not entitled to any benefits under the
Scheduled Tribes Act of 2006.
4. It is further stated in the counter affidavit
that the petitioners have not filed any application
before the Grama Sabha or Panchayat raising a claim
under the Act. If an application is filed, the Panchayat
is bound to consider that on the basis of the advice of
Forest Rights Committee. As the petitioners are not
W.P.(C).No.19702/09
:: 3 ::
entitled to the benefits under the said Act, the relief
sought for in the petition cannot be granted, it is
contended.
5. In the circumstances, learned counsel for
the petitioner submits that the petitioners’ contentions
may be left open, with liberty to file an application
before the Grama Sabha, as mentioned in the counter
affidavit of the respondents.
6. The contentions of either parties are left
open. The petitioners shall pursue their remedies
before the Grama Sabha, as mentioned above.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
(V.GIRI)
JUDGE
sk/
//true copy//
P.S. to Judge