IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID FRIDAY, THE 17TH OCTOBER 2008 / 25TH ASWINA 1930 CRP.No. 718 of 2001(F) ---------------------- LB.240/1973 of TALUK LAND BOARD, PALAKKAD .................... REVN. PETITIONER: --------------------- 1. VISALAKSHI, WIDOW OF KANDAN 2. SIVADASAN, S/O KANDAN 3. MURALEEDHARAN, S/O KANDAN 4. RAVEENDRAN, S/O KANDAN ALL ARE RESIDING AT ARUKUDI, KOTTEKKAD, PALAKKAD BY ADV. SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH SRI.KRISHNA PRASAD. S RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. THE TALUK LAND BOARD, PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN 3. THE TAHSILDAR, PALAKKAD TALUK . GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. M.K. PUSHPALATHA THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER IN C.M.P NO. 1619 OF 2001 IN C.R.P. NO. 718 OF 2001 DISMISSED SD/- HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ----------------------------------------- C.R.P.No. 718 of 2001 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the17th day of October , 2008 ORDER The legal heirs of deceased Kandan are the revision petitioners. By the impugned order dated 23.1.2001 the Taluk Land Board Palakkad decided the ceiling case initiated against Sri.Chamu and declared that the declarant is liable to surrender 20.02 ¼ acres of land as excess land. The Taluk Land Board one by one considered the objections filed by the declarant and the impugned order was passed finalising the total extent to be surrendered. 2. The learned counsel for the revision petitioners submitted that the authorised officer in his report has recommended to include the additional extent of 1.09 acres of land as exempted category under Section 81(1) of Kerala Land reforms act for the convenient enjoyment of the family house compound, bathroom, firewood shed ,and cattle shed etc. No reasons are stated by the Taluk Land Board for not accepting the report of the authorised officer and decided to exempt only 0.40 acres in Survey No. 16/4A in Malampuzha-II village. The contention of the learned counsel for the revision petitioner has some force. The Taluk Land Board ought to have accepted the authoirsed officer's report who had reported the said fact after site inspection and verification. Hence I find that the declarant is entitled to exemption of an additional extent of 0.69 acres of C.R.P. No. 718 of 2001 -2- land ( i.e 1.09 acres- 0.40 acres) under Section 81(1) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act 3. The learned senior counsel secondly contended that an extent of 4.07 acres in Malampuzha -II village and 6.84 acres in Malampuzha-I village are properties not owned or possessed by the declarant and that one Sri Velandi and One Sri Devan respectively are the title holders who have obtained purchase certificates from the Land tribunal. The authorised officer also reported that the said persons have obtained purchase certificates, that they are in possession and enjoyment of the lands for the last several years, but the Taluk Land Board did not consider the question of excluding the said lands from the ceiling area of the declarant. I am of the view that If the said lands are covered by valid purchase certificates issued by the Land Tribunal concerned, the properties are liable to be excluded from the account of the assessee. The question whether those properties are liable to be excluded or not can be decided only after hearing the interested persons who have admittedly obtained purchase certificates under the K.LR. Act . So the question whether these two items of properties can be excluded from the account of the assessee or not shall be reconsidered by the Taluk Land Board after issuing notice to the interested parties , hearing them and the legal heirs of the declarant. 4. The next point argued by the learned senior counsel is that going by the impugned order it is seen that the Taluk Land Board has not C.R.P. No. 718 of 2001 -3- given any chance for submitting the option statement. I have gone through the impugned order. Nothing is mentioned about the filing of the option statement and it is not clear whether an opportunity has been given to the declarant to file the statement by the Taluk Land Board. The Taluk Land Board held that the family A,C and D are liable to surrender the areas mentioned respectively in the order and the extent to be surrendered by each family is also mentioned. Therefore The Taluk Land Board shall give an opportunity to family A C and D to file an option statement indicating the identity of the property to be surrendered after the determination of excess land. I have already ordered that the declarant is entitled to an additional exemption of 0.69 acres of land in Survey No. 16/4A of Malampuzha-II village. for the convenient enjoyment of the family house compound bathroom fire wood shed, cattle shed etc. The question of additional exclusion of the land from the assessee's account shall be decided afresh by the Taluk Land Board on the basis of the directions made in this order. No other grounds are urged, hence the Taluk Land Board shall reconsider only the urged questions mentioned above. The Taluk Land Board shall pass fresh orders within a period of six months from the date of receipts of a copy of this Order. This Civil Revision Petition is disposed of as above. There will be no order as to cots. (HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE) es. HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. --------------------------- C.R.P No. 718 of 2001 ---------------------------- ORDER 17th October, 2008