IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 8TH PHALGUNA 1929 WA.No. 2946 of 2007(E) --------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.30298/2007 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN WRIT PETITION: ------------------------------------------------------------- SAJEEVI, S/O.DAMODARAN, NIKHARTHIL HOUSE, KOLANGHAT, MANAKUNNAM VILLAGE, UDYAMPEROOR P.O., SOUTH PARAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN, SRI.K.JAGADEESH & SRI.T.S.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN WRIT PETITION: ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE, PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDINGS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, FORT KOCHI. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, KANNAYANNUR TALUK. BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K. MEERA. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L. DATTU, CJ. & K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.A. NO. 2946 OF 2007 E --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th February, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L. DATTU, C.J: Being aggrieved by the Orders passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. (C). No.30298/07 dated 6.11.2007, the petitioner in the Writ Petition is before us in this Writ Appeal. 2. Petitioner in the Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, had called in question Ext.P1 Order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer and Ext.P2 Order passed by the Commissioner of Land Revenue dated 19.7.2006 and 2.7.2007 respectively. 3. Petitioner had filed an application before the Tahsildar, Kanayannur Taluk to assign lands in Survey No.43/1 of Manakunnam Village to an extent of 18 cents. The Tahsildar has rejected the application so filed. Aggrieved by that Order, the petitioner had filed an Appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer. The said Authority has rejected the petitioner's Appeal and thereby has confirmed the Orders passed by the Tahsildar, Kanayannur Taluk. The Order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer reads as under: "After verifying the reports of the Tahsildar, Kanayannur, Village Officer, Manakunnam and after hearing the appellant, it is found that the contention in the appeal is baseless. The land applied for assignment is kayal puramboke which is close to the Vembanattu Kayal. Kayal puramboke lands are exempted from assignment as per Rule 1(A)(VI) of Kerala Land Assignment Rules. Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in its judgments in OP 16077/96 dt. 13.01.07 and in OP 17233/96 dt. 27.06.97 has ordered that kayal/puzha puramboke lands shall not be assigned. Therefore, the appeal petition is rejected." W.A. NO.2946/07 E 2 4. Aggrieved by the Order so passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer dated 19.7.2006, petitioner has filed a Revision Petition before the Commissioner of Land Revenue. The said Authority by his Order dated 02.07.2007 has rejected the Revision Petition. While doing so, the Revisional Authority has primarily relied upon the provisions of Section 218 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act and also Rule 1(A)(VI) of the Kerala Land Assignment Rules. Aggrieved by these two Orders passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer and the Commissioner of Land Revenue, the petitioner was before this Court in W.P.(C). No.30298/07. The learned Single Judge relying upon the Judgments in O.P. Nos.17233/96 and 16077/96, has rejected the Writ Petition. That is how the petitioner is before us in this Writ Appeal. 5. Shri P.B. Sahasranaman, learned counsel appearing for the appellant strenuously contended before this Court that the Authorities were not justified in rejecting the petitioner's application for assignment of the land situated on the back- waters. Therefore, he submits that the Authorities were not justified in relying upon the decisions of this Court in O.P. Nos.16077/96 and 17233/96 and also the Judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(C). No.24064/03 dated 29.9.2004. 6. The Authorities while rejecting the application filed by the appellant/petitioner for assignment of the lands situated in Sy. No.43/1 of Manakunnam Village have assigned two reasons: firstly, it is a Kayal puramboke land and therefore assignment cannot be granted in view of Rule 1(A)(VI) of the Kerala Land Assignment Rules, and secondly, in view of Section 218 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act (for short, `The Act'), the land shall vest in the Grama Panchayat, and the land so vested cannot be assigned except in a case covered under Rule 24 of the Rules, that too in public interest by the Government. The admitted fact is that the land in question is a Kayal Puramboke land. 7. In the instant case, the lands in question, as rightly observed by the W.A. NO.2946/07 E 3 Commissioner of Land Revenue, are vested in the Village Panchayat and it is only that Village Panchayat, if the law permits, can assign the lands and it cannot be assigned either by the Tahsildar or the Board of Revenue under the provisions of the Kerala Land Assignment Act and the Rules framed thereunder. In that view of the matter, without going into the other details of the case, the Writ Appeal is disposed of, by confirming the Orders passed by the learned Single Judge. If for any reason, the appellant is of the opinion that the lands in question can be assigned by the Village Panchayat or the Grama Panchayat, he is at liberty to approach the Authorities for appropriate reliefs. Ordered accordingly. H.L. DATTU, CHIEF JUSTICE K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk.