IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 19TH MARCH 2010 / 28TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 14065 of 2009(C) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- PARAMESWARA KURUP, S/O.ACHUTHA KURUP, AGED 63 YEARS, KANDAMPLAYIL (H), THRIKARIYOOR VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM. BY ADV. MR.M.V.SABU RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, KOTHAMANGALAM. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, THRIKARIYOOR VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM. 5. THE SECRETARY, KOTHAMANGALAM MUNICIPALITY, KOTHAMANGALAM. 6. SRI.MEERAN, S/O.ANTHRU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, NAIKAMMAVUDI HOUSE, THRIKARIYOOR VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM. R1 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.M.A.ASIF R5 BY ADV. MR.V.M.KURIAN R6 BY ADV. MR.C.H.ABDUL RASAC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.14065/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 1.7.1996 OF THE IST RESPONDENT. P2:- COPY OF THE EXCHAGE DEED NO.7493/96 DTD. 5.11.1996 OF KOTHAMANGALAM, SRO. P3:- COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.2309/97 DTD. 15.4.1997 OF KOTHAMANGALAM SRO. P4:- COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 5.2.1998 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P5:- COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 22.10.2005 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT. P6:- COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 6.1.2006 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P7:- COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 21.12.07 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P8:- COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 25.2.2008 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P9:- COPY OF THE APPLCIATION DTD. 9.3.2009 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P10:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 10.3.2009 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT 1-5. P11:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 12.3.2009 IN WPC. 7912/09. P12:- COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 28.4.2009 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P13:- COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 10/6/09. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE tss T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 14065 of 2009-C - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of March, 2010. JUDGMENT The main prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to the third respondent to effect transfer of registry of 3 cents of land in Sy. No.378/1 of Thrikkariyoor village of Kothamangalam and to quash Ext.P12. 2. The parties agree that the matter can be directed to be considered by the Government under Rule 24 of the Kerala Land Assignment Rules. 3. Necessary facts for the disposal of the writ petition are the following: The petitioner was the owner in possession of 3 cents of land in Sy. No.378/1 of Thrikariyoor Village of Kothamangalam Taluk which is situated by the side of Aluva – Munnar road at Thangalam of Kothamangalam Municipality. 4. The fifth respondent Municipality, in 1994, decided to construct a bus sand at Thangalam by reclaiming the property situated in Sy. No.378/1. As there was no road access to the property, to create road access the fifth respondent requested the petitioner to give 3 cents of land in Sy. No.378/1 in exchange of 3 cents of land in Sy. No.378/1 of the same village belonging to the Municipality. Sanction of the Government was sought, wpc 14065/2009 2 which was granted as per Ext.P1 order dated 1.7.1996. Ext.P2 is the copy of the exchange deed subsequently executed between the petitioner and the Municipality and thus the properties were exchanged and the road was constructed. The petitioner constructed a building in the property. He sought for effecting mutation and submitted an application for assignment in the form prescribed, as directed in Ext.P4. He had been approaching various authorities in the matter and finally by Ext.P9, he filed an application for transfer of registry under Rule 4 of the Transfer of Registry Rules and later approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.7912/2009 wherein, this Court, by Ext.P11 judgment, issued a direction to the third respondent to consider his application. By Ext.P12, the Tahsildar took the view that the property which was exchanged by the Municipality is Government puramboke and therefore, as there is no patta, mutation cannot be effected even though Government sanction was obtained as per Ext.P1. It is mentioned in Ext.P12 that the mutation can be effected only if assignment is granted to the property, to which a report has been forwarded to the District Collector and that the petitioner can also move to get such an order. 5. The third respondent has filed a counter affidavit stating that Ext.P2 exchange deed was executed in respect of a patta land on one side wpc 14065/2009 3 and a Government puramboke land on the other side. Since the title of the impugned land is vested with the Government, there is no absolute transfer of title in respect of the land and hence transfer of registry could not be effected. It is also mentioned that the third respondent has directed the petitioner to make an application for assignment since mutation could not be effected. It is also mentioned that the annual income and extent of patta land held by the petitioner comes beyond the limit for which assignment in concessional rates could not be made. It is further mentioned that since the land is Government puramboke, the petitioner is entitled only to get the land assigned and no mutation can be effected as per Transfer of Registry Rules. 6. The petitioner is relying upon Rule 24 of the Kerala Land Assignment Rules which confers power on the Government to assign land. The said power is evidently provided notwithstanding anything in the rules. 7. Herein, the petitioner had to exchange the land for the purpose of providing road access to the bus stand constructed by the Municipality which is a public purpose. The Government had issued sanction for the exchange of the land belonging to the Municipality, as evidenced by Ext.P1 order dated 1.7.1996 of the Local Administration Department. No consequential actions have been taken in the light of the above sanction. wpc 14065/2009 4 8. What is involved is therefore, only a formal order granting assignment of the land as per Ext.P2 to save him from the present predicament. It is in these circumstances, by Ext.P12 he was given a reply to seek for assignment of the land as no mutation could be effected since the property was a Government puramboke land, even though it was vested in the Municipality under the relevant provisions of the Municipality Act. Therefore, in the revenue records still it is mentioned as Government puramboke. 9. In that view of the matter, unless an assignment of the land is ordered in favour of the petitioner, the petitioner’s request cannot be met. The general rules of assignment and the question of considering his annual income and extent of land and its possession will not come in the way of granting such assignment, especially in the light of Ext.P1 order passed by the Government and the assignment is only a follow up action in the matter. 10. Therefore, respondents 2 and 3 are directed to forward the application of the petitioner for assignment of the land exchanged by him as per Ext.P2, viz. 3 cents of land in Sy. No.378/1 of Thrikariyoor village which was vested with the Municipality, but it is shown as Government puramboke in the revenue records along with necessary reports. By invoking Rule 24 of the Kerala Land Assignment Rules, the Government wpc 14065/2009 5 will pass an order of assignment of the said land in favour of the petitioner. The files will be forwarded by respondents 2 and 3 within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and the Government will pass appropriate orders as directed above, within a further period of two months. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/