IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 34157 of 2006(N)
1. THOMAS MICHAEL, MANNARKATTU VEEDU,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER,
... Respondent
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
3. THE TAHASILDAR,
4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
For Petitioner :SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
Dated :31/01/2007
O R D E R
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J
-------------------------------------------
W.P(C).No.34157 OF 2006
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 31st day of January, 2007
JUDGMENT
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Government Pleader.
2. According to the petitioner, he is in possession and
enjoyment of 22 cents of land in Sy.No.62/10C of KDH village in
Idukki district from 1971 and as per Ext.P1 Kuthakapattam
agreement, the third respondent gave possession of the property
to the petitioner in 1986 and that Ext.P3 receipt would show
that rent was accepted from the petitioner even after the period
of the Kuthakapattam. According to the petitioner, he has made
Ext.P4 application for assignment of land. However, on the
allegation that respondents 3 and 4 are threatening to evict the
petitioner in summary eviction procedure under the Land
Conservancy Act, this writ petition is filed seeking a direction to
consider Ext.P4 and also to desist from dispossessing the
petitioner.
WPC.34157/06
Page numbers
3. For one thing, if there is an application under the Land
Assignment Act in the form of Ext.P4, the competent statutory
authority will have to consider the same on merits . But that
does not necessarily mean that under the cover of such an
application any intruder of the property shall be in possession
without facing any decision under the Land Conservancy Act.
The Act itself contains protective measures for having the
occupation of land.
4. On 21.12.2006, this Court had issued an interim order
directing the petitioner to file an affidavit stating the details of
property owned by him and his family members within the State.
However, no such affidavit has been filed.
In the aforesaid circumstances, this writ petition is
disposed of directing that if the competent among the
respondents has received Ext.P4 and is pending, the same shall
be considered and disposed of in accordance with law. The
WPC.34157/06
Page numbers
competent officer will make an endeavour to finally dispose of
any such application within an outer limit of six months from the
date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is clarified that this
judgment does not, in any manner, touch upon the entitlement or
otherwise of the petitioner to such assignment.
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
Judge
kkb.