IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID TUESDAY, THE 10TH JUNE 2008 / 20TH JYAISHTA 1930 CRP.No. 682 of 2005() --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 10.3.2005 IN S.M.6/76/THALASSERY OF THE TALUK LAND BOARD, THALASSERY REVN. PETITIONER: APPLICANT NO.1: -------------------------------------- PALAKKANDY BHARATHAN, S/O. KUNHIKANNAN, POVAMULLAPARAMBA HOUSE, MOKERI AMSOM, VALLIYAYI DESOM, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. MUTHIRAKKALAYI MADHAVI, MOKERI AMSOM, VALLIYAYI DESOM, MUTHIYANGA (P.O), PATHAYAKUNNU (VIA), KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.M.KAMMAPPU SRI.T.A.RAMADASAN FOR R1 THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/06/2008 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ------------------------------------------ C.R.P No. 682 of 2005 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of June 2008 ORDER The Applicant No.1 in S.M.6/76/Thalassery is the revision petitioner He claims ownership and possession over 97 Cents of property in R.S. 93/1A 93/1C and 93/1D Mokeri Amsom Valliyayi desom of Thalassery Taluk. In the ceiling proceedings initiated against the 1st respondent the Taluk Land Board by order dated 6.4.1977 an extent of 27.38 acres of land was ordered to be surrendered as excess land. According to the revision petitioner the respondent while taking possession of the property pursuant to the above said order also took possession of 97 Cents of property belonging to the revision petitioner . In such circumstances the revision petitioner was constrained to file petition under Section 85(8) of the Kerala land Reforms Act claiming right and title over the property. 2. The Taluk Land Board instructed the authorised officer to submit an enquiry report int his regard. The authorised officer submitted an enquiry report on 26.2.2004 wherein he reported that an extent of 2.98 1/3 acres of land were assigned to ten eligible agricultural labourers as per the proceedings of District Collector , Kannur dated 14.1.2001 and an extent of 0.33 2/3 acres of land were reserved for the road to Navodaya school and way to the assigned lands. He has further reported that Government had been conducted auction sale for collecting usufructs in this surplus land till the land is assigned to the eligible agricultural C.R. P No. 682 of 2005 -2- labourers. The applicants did not file any objection regarding either the possession of property or the collection of usufructs in the property. 3. Thereafter the Taluk Land Board had passed final order directing the declarant to surrender the excess land on 6.4.1977 and the Tahsildar had taken over possession of the excess land on 31.5.1977. It is mentioned in the final order that the reports of the authorised officer dated 26.6.2001 and 26.2.2004 revealed that further extent of land is not remaining to be assigned. It is also stated that under Section 85 (9) C of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, the Taluk Land Board has no power to initiate any proceedings after the expiry of seven years from the date on which the order ought to be set aside, has become final. 4. The Taluk Land Board noted that the applicants filed their objections only on 10.12.2003 after a lapse of 26 years. The Board also noticed the fact that, immediately after taking possession of the property the usufructs of the property were auctioned by the Tahsildar On the facts and circumstances discussed by the Taluk Land Board, the Board is of the opinion that the claim petitions are filed at this distance of time, with ulterior motives. I find no reason to interfere with the order passed by the Taluk Land Board in the given circumstances This Civil revision petition is without any merit; and is accordingly dismissed. There will be no order as to costs. HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE es