IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 19TH JUNE 2008 / 29TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 18376 of 2008(K) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER: ------------------- KALATHIL AMBADY, S/O. KANNAN, KARUVACHERRY, P.O.NIELSHWAR, HOSDURG TALUK, KASERKOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.PHILIP ANTONY CHACKO SRI.P.M.SEBASTIAN RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, STATE OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE CUSTODIAN OF ECOLOGICALLY FRAGILE LANDS APPOINTED AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF ACT NO.21 OF 2005 AND PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, KANNUR DIVISION, P.O.THANA, KANNUR. 5. THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER, KANHANGAD, KASARKODE DISTRICT. BY SRI. I.V. PREMOD, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J =================== W.P (C) .No.18376 of 2008 =================== Dated this the 19th day of June, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the owner of certain lands. The grievance of the petitioner is that a part of the land which has not been notified under the Kerala Forest (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Lands) Act, 2003 is being proceeded against under that Act. The Petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs: “a) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents not to take forceful possession of the 3 Acres and 90 cents of petitioner's property in Sy.No.109 in Palavayal Amsom and desom, Hosdurg Taluk in Kaserkode (Dt) covered by Ext.P5 and Ext.P6 documents without resorting the due process of law. b) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondents not interfere with the legal possession of the petitioner's over 7 ½ Acres of Land in Sy.No.109 in Palavayal Amson and desom, Hosdrug Taluk in Kaserkode (Dt)covered by Ext.P5 and Ext.P6 documents. c) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to issue necessary orders directing the officers below them, to receive Basic Land Tax from the petitioner and also to issue the possession certificate for the property covered under Ext.P5 and Ext.P6 document, to the petitioner. W.P (C) .No.18376 of 2008 - 2 - d) to issue appropriate writ, order or direction not to further proceed with the operation and implementation of Section 3 & 4 of the Act with respect to the petitioner's 3 Acres and 90 cents of land comprised in R.S.No. 109 of Palavayal Amsom and desom, Hosdurg Taluk, in Kaserkode (Dt.). e) to issue a writ of appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring that petitioner's 3 Acres and 90 cents of land in R.S.No.109 of Palavayal Amsom and desom, Hosdurg Taluk, in Kaserkode (Dt.) covered by Ext.P5 and Ext.P5 documents and not notified under the Act, is not and Ecologically Fragile Land under the Act. f) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or interim direction, directing the respondents, to permit the petitioner and his workers to enter and to do the normal agricultural operations of planting, manuring, watering, cutting and undergrowth, removing of weeds and maintaining the property of the petitioner covered by Ext.P5 and Ext.P6 documents or at least in the 3 Acres and 90 cents not notified under the Act, comprised in R.S. No. 109 of Palavayal Amsom and desom, Hosdurg Taluk in Kaserkode (Dt) forthwith.” 2. From the very pleadings, it is evident that there is a dispute as to whether the petitioner's land is an ecologically fragile land and whether any portion of the petitioner's property is vested in the Government or not. That dispute squarely comes within Section 10 of the Act, which reads thus: “10. Settlement of disputes by Tribunal - (1) Where any dispute arises as to whether - a) any land is an ecologically fragile land or not; or W.P (C) .No.18376 of 2008 - 3 - b) any ecologically fragile land or portion thereof has vested in the Government or not; or c) the compensation determined under section 8 is insufficient or not the person who claims that the land is not an ecologically fragile land or that the ecologically fragile land has not vested in the Government or that the compensation is not sufficient, may, within five years from the date of commencement of this Act or within six months from the date of the notification under sub-section (1) of section 4 declaring the land to be an ecologically fragile land or the date of communication of compensation under section 8, as the case may be, or within such time as the Government may notify in this behalf apply to the Tribunal for settlement of the dispute. (2) An application under sub-section (1) shall be in such form and contain such particulars as may be prescribed.” Therefore, I am of opinion that the petitioner's remedy lies in approaching the Tribunal by filing an appropriate application in that regard. Therefore, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to file an application under Section 10, this writ petition is dismissed. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs