IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER TUESDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2008 / 17TH ASHADHA 1930 WA.No.1329 of 2008 ----------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.15829/2007 Dated 02/06/2008 .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONER: ------------------------------------- P.M.SIDDIQUE, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.P.M.MOHAMED ALI, RESIDING AT PADIYATH HOUSE, P.O.EDAVILANGU, KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.) SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI SMT.SMITHA GEORGE RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------------------- 1. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE METHALA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.P.SREEKRISHNAN. R2 BY ADV.SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & A.K.BASHEER, J. ----------------------------------------------------- W.A.No.1329 of 2008 ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 8th day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu, C.J. The appellant before us is calling in question the correctness or otherwise of the orders passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.15829 of 2007 dated 2nd June, 2008. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has rejected the writ petition. 2. The appellant claims that he is in possession of 70 cents of land in Survey No.81/1 of Methala Panchayat in Kodungalloor Taluk in Thrissur District. He also claims that he is in possession of the adjacent land, wherein a cinema theater is constructed about three decades back. 3. The appellant had filed representations before the State Government dated 31-7-2003, 1-4-2004 and 27-1-2005, inter alia requesting the State Government to assign 70 cents of land in Survey No.81/1 of Methala Panchayat to the appellant. The said request of the appellant is rejected by the State Government by its order dated 24-6-2006. The said order was the subject matter of the writ petition W.A.No.1329/2008 -2- before the learned Single Judge. 4. The orders passed by the State Government dated 24-6-2006 reads as under: “Inviting attention to reference. Your request for assignment of 70 cents of lands in Survey No.81/1 of Methala Village cannot be accepted considering the request of the panchayat seeking the said land for public purpose.” 5. The learned Single Judge has rejected the writ petition on the ground, that, as a matter of right the petitioner cannot be asking for assignment of Government land. Further, the learned Single Judge has observed that the Grama Panchayat has made a request to the State Government to assign that land for its purpose and therefore no exception can be taken to the order passed by the State Government. 6. Sri. Ramaprasad Unni, learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that the action of the State Government is not only arbitrary but also violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. 7. The Kerala Government Land Assignment Act, 1960 (“Act” for short) is promulgated to regulate the assignment of Government lands and to remove doubts as to the validity of the limitations and restrictions imposed in assignments of land by the W.A.No.1329/2008 -3- Government or under their authority. Section 3 of the Act speaks of assignment of Government land. Sub-section 1 of Section 3 of the Act gives discretion to the State Government or the authorities coming under the Act to assign Government land either absolutely or subject to such restrictions, limitations and conditions as may be prescribed at the time of assignment of the Government land. 8. Sub-section 2 of Section 3 of the Act is relevant for the purpose of this case. Therefore it is extracted and it reads as under: “3 (2). No Government land assignable for public purpose may be assigned under sub- section (1) without consulting the local authority as defined in the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (13 of 1994) or the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994 (20 of 1994) as the case may be and if such local authority required such land, for carrying out any of the functions assigned to it, Government may set apart such land for that purpose. Explanation--Any restriction as to alienation, whether voluntary or otherwise, of the rights of the assignee, shall, be a restriction within the meaning of this section. “ 9. Section 4 of the Act prescribes the procedures to be followed before Government lands are assigned. 10. In the instant case, the Grama Panchayat has W.A.No.1329/2008 -4- approached the State Government to allot 70 cents of land in Survey No.81/1 of Methala Panchayat in Kodungalloor Taluk in Thrissur District. It is the very same land that the appellant/petitioner is requesting the State Government to assign under the provisions of the Kerala Government Land Assignment Act, 1960. Sub-section 2 of Section 3 of the Act clearly indicates that the Government land assignable for public purpose may not be assigned by the State Government without consulting the local authority as defined either under the provisions of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 or the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994. 11. As we have already indicated that the Grama Panchayat has already approached the State Government for assignment of lands in Survey No.81/1 of Methala Panchayat in Kodungalloor Taluk in Thrissur District. Keeping in view the request of the Grama Panchayat, the Government, in exercise of its powers under Section 3 of the Act has refused to concede to the request made by the appellant. 12. In the impugned order passed by the State Government it is made clear that, since the Grama Panchayat wants the aforesaid land for public purpose, the same cannot be assigned to the appellant. In our opinion, a reading of the impugned order would only show that, the W.A.No.1329/2008 -5- authorities, taking into consideration the request of the Grama Panchayat has refused to concede to the request of the appellant. We do not see any arbitrariness or any violation of the provisions of the Act or any constitutional provision. The action of the State Government is in conformity with the provisions contained in sub-section 2 of Section 3 of the Act. In that view of the matter, while concurring the findings and conclusion reached by the learned Single Judge, we reject the writ appeal. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (A.K.BASHEER) JUDGE MS/dk