IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH JUNE 2009 / 20TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 16440 of 2008(F) -------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. K.N.DEVADATHAN, SRIVILAS, SANGEETHA ROAD, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. CHANDRIKA, CHANDRIKA VILAS, ALAYAKKAD, TEMPLE ROAD, PERINTHALMANNA. BY ADV. MR.P.N.PURUSHOTHAMA KAIMAL. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERLA, REP.BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CUSTODIAN OF VESTED FOREST & CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, VESTED FOREST CIRCLE, KOZHIKODE. 3. THE DISTRICT FOREST OFFICER, PALAKKAD. R1 TO R3 BY SPL.GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. P.M. POULOSE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.16440/2008-F: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 680/81 DTD. 10/02/1981. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 681/81 DTD. 01/02/1995. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE DOCUMENT EXECUTED IN FAVOUR OF G. NEELAKANTAN NAMBOOTHIRI DTD. 06/07/1979. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE RUBBER BOARD CERTIFICATE OF THE P.1. DTD. 30/07/1984. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE RUBBER BOARD CERTIFICATE OF S. MOHANAN DTD. 15/06/1981. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE LOAN CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY PALAKAD CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK TO THE P.1. DTD. 03/12/1997. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE LOAN CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY PALAKKAD CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK TO THE P.1. DTD. 03/12/1997. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.A. 170/77 OF FOREST TRIBUNAL, PALAKKAD DTD. 30/06/1988. EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE PAPER REPORT APPEARED IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DTD. 29/02/2008. EXT.P.10: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.NO.8502/08 OF HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA DTD. 24/03/2008. EXT.P.11: COPY OF THE PAPER PUBLICATION APPEARED IN MATHRUBHOOMI DAILY DTD. 08/04/2009. EXT.P.12: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY P.1. TO R.2. DTD. 29/04/2009. RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURE R2.A: AMMEXIRE R2.A: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 24/03/2008 IN W.P.(C).8502/2008. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. V.GIRI, J ....................... W.P.(C).16440/2008 ....................... Dated this the 10th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner purchased an extent of 11 acres 55 cents of property comprised in survey Nos. 40/1 and 357/95 of Kinavalloor Amsom Parali, under Exts.P1 and P2 documents. The vendor of the petitioner had obtained the same as assignee from Kunhunni Nair, who in turn had taken the property from Subramanya Iyer, who allegedly got it from Poomully mana. Kunhunni Nair had filed an application as O.A.170/77 and certificate of purchase was issued in favour of Kunhunni Nair. Forest officials were not parties to the proceedings before the Land Tribunal. Subsequently, the State sought for a review of order passed by the Land Tribunal in O.A.170/77. Review was allowed and ultimately the order was affirmed by the Supreme Court itself. Net result of these proceedings was that the complainant became unable to assert any title over the property which was eligible to be treated as land vested in the Government. W.P.(C).16440/2008 2 2. According to the respondents, land was eligible to be treated as a private forest vested in terms of the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1920. Even if the contentions of the petitioner are appreciated, he obviously does not have a vestige of right over the property. Though the review petition filed by the State was allowed as early as on 30.6.1988, property in question could be taken possession of by the respondents only in 2008. In other words, petitioners had the benefit of collecting yield from the property for a period of almost 20 years after it became clear that he had no title to the same. This is apart from the fact that they had benefit of the property from 1981 to 1988. 3. Petitioners approached this Court earlier in Writ Petition No.8502/2008 for a direction to the respondents to hand over possession of the property covered by Exts.P1 and P2 to enable them to take W.P.(C).16440/2008 3 the yield there from. Writ petition was dismissed under Ext.P10 judgment holding that the land in question is a vested private forest and possession of the same is already vested in the State. Subsequently respondents took steps to auction the right to collect yield from the property and there upon, present writ petition has been filed seeking a declaration that the petitioners are entitled to cut and remove the rubber trees planted in the property. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned special Government Pleader. 5. That the property belongs to the State and is vested in the same is no longer open to controversy. This fact has again been reaffirmed in Ext.P10 judgment. The plea made by the petitioners for a right to cut and remove the rubber trees planted by them, allegedly in the year 1981 also is misconceived. On a review petition filed by the W.P.(C).16440/2008 4 State in relation to the order passed by the Land Tribunal being allowed, it came about that the assignor of the petitioners also was declared to have no title to the property. Consequently the petitioners also became disabled from asserting any right to the property vested in the Government. Therefore, there is no merit in the further plea raised by the petitioners that they should be given a chance to remove the trees because they were planted in the year 1981. Writ petition is bereft of merit. Hence, the same is dismissed. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs