IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
CRP No. 261 of 2006()
1. STATE OF KERALA.
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE PRESIDENT/SECRETARY,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
For Respondent :SRI.BABU S. NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
Dated :15/01/2007
O R D E R
M.Sasidharan Nambiar,J.
C.R.P.No.261 of 2006
Dated, this the 15
th
day of January, 2007
O R D E R
State is challenging the proceedings of
Taluk Land Board dated 11.12.03 whereunder,
holding that State Land Board had declared
respondent Institution as a religious institution
of public nature, Taluk Land Board dropped the
proceedings initiated against the respondent
under section 85 of Kerala Land Reforms Act.
2. The Taluk Land Board, Mananthavady had
originally initiated ceiling case SMC 480/77 to
surrender 8.72 acres. Case was reopened as there
was no evidence to prove that respondent is a
religious and charitable institution. Thereafter
Taluk Land Board as per impugned order dated
11.12.03 held that State Land Board proceedings
dated 31.8.71 available in old Taluk Land Board
files show that State Land Board had declared
CRP 261/06 2
respondent institution as a religious institution
of public nature and therefore dropped further
proceedings in the ceiling case.
3. Learned Government pleader and learned
counsel appearing for respondent were heard.
4. Learned Government pleader submitted that
Explanation to Section 98A of Kerala Land Reforms
Act mandates that neither the Taluk Land Board nor
State Land Board is competent to decide the
question whether respondent is a religious
institution and that question can be decided only
by State Government and therefore impugned order is
to be quashed. Learned counsel appearing for
respondent argued that under sub section (2) of
Section 65, Taluk Land Board is competent to decide
the question whether respondent is a religious
institution of a public nature and therefore the
order is not be quashed. It was also argued that
respondent is a Wakf as is clear from Gazette
Notification and therefore revision is only to be
dismissed.
CRP 261/06 3
5. Section 65 provides special provisions
relating to religious charitable or educational
institution of public nature. Under the said
section Land Board is competent to decide an
application filed before it to choose whether the
right, title , interest of institution in respect
of holding should be vested in the Government in
consideration of the payment of an annuity in
perpetuity by the Government or whether it should
be paid such annuity by the Government, instead of
purchase price. in case the holding is purchased
by cultivating tenant under the provisions of the
Act. It has no application with regard to Chapter
III dealing with the ceiling provisions. Section
98A provides that for the purpose of Chapter III
the term ‘person’ shall not include a Co-operative
Society or an institution of a public nature for
religious or charitable purposes established and
maintained by a religious denomination or any
Section thereof or Board of Trustees for the
improvements of city of Trivandrum constituted
CRP 261/06 4
under section 3 of Trivandrum City Improvement
Trust Act 1960. Explanation makes the position
absolutely clear. It reads:-
“If any question arises as to
whether an institution is an
institution of a public nature
for religious and charitable
purposes maintained by a
religious denomination or any
section thereof, the question
shall be decided by the
Government and such decision
shall be final.
Therefore under section 98A when any question arise
as to whether an institution is an institution of a
public nature for religious and charitable purposes
maintained by a religious denomination or any
section thereof, that question shall be decided by
Government and not by Taluk land Board or by State
Land Board and such decision of the Government
CRP 261/06 5
shall be final. The question has been considered
by a learned single Judge (as His Lordship then
was) of this Court in Mother Superior v. Taluk
Land Board (1989 (1) KLT 267.) It was held that
Taluk Land Board is not competent to decide that
question without referring the matter to the
government. That exactly is the position herein.
6. The impugned order is quashed. Taluk land
Board is directed to refer the question whether
respondent is an Institution of a public nature for
religious and charitable denomination or any
section thereof to the State Government and the
decision of the Government shall be final on that
question.
Civil Revision Petition is disposed as above.
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
JUDGE
Tpl/-