IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 5TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 16TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 3704 of 2009(N) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- C.A.ABDUL RAHIM, S/O.ABDUL RAUF, CHENNAMPILLY HOUSE, CHERANALLUR PO., CHERANALLUR PO., COCHIN-682034. BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI SRI.T.S.SHYAM PRASANTH SRI.T.R.SADEESAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 2. TAHSILDAR, KANAYANNUR TALUK, KANAYANNUR, ERNAKULAM. 3. COMMISSINER OF LAND REVENUE, TRIVANDRUM. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. SHRI.M.P.SREEKRISHNAN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.3704 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 5th day of February, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner submits that 33 cents of land in R.S.No.601/5 of Cheranallur Village had been in the possession of his deceased father. According to him, on the death of his father, the possession continued with the family members. It is stated that the land is lying adjacent to their private property, and is essential for its beneficial enjoyment. 2. According to the petitioner, applications were made for assignment of the land and without passing orders, attempt was being made to allot the said land to strangers and to dispossess the present occupants. With this grievance, the petitioner had filed a writ petition before this Court as WP(C) No.1483/2009. That writ petition was disposed of by Ext.P11 judgment dated 14/01/2009 directing the 1st respondent, District Collector, to consider the assignment application made by the petitioner on an expeditious basis. In the meantime, it was also directed to maintain status quo in regard to the possession of the said land. WP(C) no.3704/2009 -2- 3. The matter was considered by the District Collector and Ext.P13 order has been passed. In Ext.P13, it is stated that the land in respect of which the application was made for assignment, was necessary for the future development of the projects undertaken by the Government, and therefore, the application for assignment of the land cannot be allowed. 4. In regard to the details of the purpose for which the land is proposed to be utilised, the learned Government Pleader, on instructions, informs that the land is proposed to be assigned to evictees from the International Container Transshipment Terminal Project site. Evidently, therefore, this is a public purpose, and the land is that of Government. If the Government wants to use the land for rehabilitation of the evictees of the aforesaid project, that purpose have the priority over the application made by a private individual for assignment of the land on the ground that the same is necessary for the beneficial enjoyment of the remaining portion of his land. I do not see any irregularity either in Ext.P13 or the purpose for which the land is sought to be used. The writ petition fails and is, accordingly, dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg