IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 3RD OCTOBER 2008 / 11TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 28907 of 2008(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- C.N. SANKARA KURUP, CHITTAYIL HOUSE, AYINI NADA, MARADU, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.MOHAN C.MENON RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (L.C UNIT) COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, THRISSUR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SUDHA DEVI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No.28907 of 2008 -------------------------- Dated this the 3rd October, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner challenges Exhibit-P17 proceedings of the Special Tahasildar under the Land Conservancy Act requiring him to be evicted from the land having an extent of 4 cents in Sy. No.112/1 of the Maradu village. According to the petitioner, he came into occupation of the land during 1960 and the land was Government poramboke but lying near a temple coming under the Cochin Devaswom Board. An application for assignment of the said land in favour of the petitioner is pending before the second respondent. Exhibit-P8 will show that the Village Officer and Revenue Inspector had visited the land in the occupation of the petitioner and had recommended the assignment of the land in favour of the petitioner. They had also treated the land as Government poramboke. Apparently, final orders under the Land Assignment Act are yet to be passed. It is in the W.P ( C) No.28907 of 2008 2 meanwhile, that proceedings under the Land Conservancy Act was initiated on the premise that land is Devaswom poramboke and not Government poramboke as such. In the meanwhile, petitioner had converted his hut which is originally situated into the property into a regular building, property tax was paid and he has been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the same. He has availed electric connection to the building in the property as also water connection. Charges have been paid. 2. Exhibit-P17 order is appealable under Section 16 of the Land Conservancy Act before the concerned Revenue Divisional Officer. It is open to the petitioner to avail the same. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case and to enable the petitioner to avail the same, further proceedings pursuant to Exhibit-P17 and P18 shall be kept in abeyance for a period of six months from today. In the meanwhile, if the petitioner files an appeal against Exhibit-P17 within a period of one month from today, the competent authority shall dispose of the same, after hearing the petitioner or a W.P ( C) No.28907 of 2008 3 representative, within a period of four months from the date on which the appeal is filed. There will be a further direction to the second respondent to pass final orders on the petitioner's application for assignment of the land mentioned in Exhibit-P1 under the provisions of the Land Assignment Act and the rules thereunder in the light of Exhibit-P8 Mahazar and report as such, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. A copy of this judgment along with copy of the writ petition shall be independently produced by the petitioner before the Revenue Divisional Officer as well as the second respondent. (V.GIRI,JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No.28907 of 2008 4 W.P ( C) No.28907 of 2008 5