IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH MARCH 2008 / 6TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 10124 of 2008(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------- C.SASIDHARAN NAIR VASANTHAVILASOM BUNGLOW, MARIYAPURAM P.O., VIA AMARAVILA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST BY ADV. SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.SREEDHARAN NAIR SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR RESPONDENT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY GOVT. PLEADER, SRI.I.V. PRAMOD. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/03/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ----------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 10124 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of March, 2008 JUDGMENT The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P17. Petitioner submits that he had applied for assignment of a portion of land. Earlier he had filed a writ petition before this Court and that was disposed of by Ext.P16 judgment. In that judgment the submission of the learned Government Pleader that, the application of the petitioner will be considered by the Government itself with notice to the petitioner, was recorded and the writ petition was disposed of. It was accordingly that the Government considered the application and rejected the claim by Ext.P17. The reasons for rejecting the request of the petitioner are mentioned in Ext.P17 in the following words: “From what has been debated at length it is understood that the land in question is likely to be required for the future widening of the bund, as informed by the Panchayat. It is a narrow road at present. If this land is required for future widening then Government will be forced to acquire this land by paying the market value. The land is not listed in the list of assignable lands kept in the Taluk Office. The applicant is not a landless person. It is reported WPC No. 10124 OF 2008 2 that he has registered holdings in many places. There are many landless persons who have preferred their assignment applications in the Taluk Office without getting any positive response due to dearth of assignable lands. The applicant could not convincingly prove that the land is indispensably required for the beneficial enjoyment of his registered holding. The said land forms a common, border with many other registered holdings. In this light the assignment application is rejected. The District Collector is directed to demarcate the land and keep it for public purpose. ” 2. In the light of the reasons thus stated by the Government, particularly, that the land is not included in the list of assignable lands, the petitioner can have no legally sustainable claim. The Writ Petition is only to be dismissed and I do so. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE ttb WPC No. 10124 OF 2008 3