IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 8TH JANUARY 2010 / 18TH POUSHA 1931 CRP.No. 358 of 2006() --------------------- TLB.1750/73/2006 of TALUK LAND BOARD, TALIPARAMBA .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S)/APPLICANT: ------------------------------- AYITHANATH JOSEPH, S/O. MANI, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, PARIKALAM, TALIPARAMBA. BY ADV. SRI.V.RAJAGOPAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. TALUK LAND BOARD, THALIPARAMBA. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1 & R2 THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/01/2010 ALONG WITH CRP NO.359 OF 2006 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER IN I.A.NO.1572/2006 IN CRP.358/2006 DISMISSED. 8.1.2010 S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------- C.R.P.NOS.358 & 359 OF 2006 () ----------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of January, 2010 O R D E R These revisions are filed by two claimants against the orders passed by the Taluk Land Board, Thaliparamba turning down their claim petitions moved under Section 85(8) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act in respect of portions of land, the possession of which had been taken over as excess land in the ceiling proceedings initiated against one K.T.Kunhappa Nambiar, the declarant in ceiling proceedings TLB/1750/73/TBA. The declarant had been directed to surrender an extent of 19.35 acres of land by order dated 30.6.1981 in the above proceedings. The order of the Taluk Land Board would show that the lands ordered for surrender were taken over possession by the Tahsildar on 28.8.1981 and 22.10.1981 respectively. Fifteen years thereafter, the present petitioners have moved claim petitions in respect of portions of that land. After scrutiny of their claims, the Taluk Land Board found no merit in the claim raised and the petitions were dismissed. In the revisions filed challenging against the CRP.358 & 359/06 2 orders passed by the Taluk Land Board, it is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners that by virtue of the amendment brought to the Land Reforms Act under Act 21 of 2006, petitioners are entitled to the benefit under Section 7E of the Amended Act. I am not impressed by the submissions made. First of all, to claim the benefit under Section 7E of the amended Act, the claimant should be in possession of the land and satisfy other conditions specified under that section. The land involved in the present case had already been taken over possession by the Taluk Land Board 15 yeas prior to the claim petitions moved by the petitioners. Secondly, the Taluk Land Board has no authority to determine any right in respect of a benefit claimed under Section 7E of the amended Act brought in by way of amendment to the Land Reforms Act. Petitioners, if they are entitled to any benefit under Section 7E, can pursue such remedies, if available under the law, before the competent authority. Subject to the above observation, these revisions are dismissed. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE prp