IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 22ND FEBRUARY 2010 / 3RD PHALGUNA 1931 CRP.No. 3148 of 2000(F) ---------------------------------- TLB.949/1973 of TALUK LAND BOARD, MANANTHODY .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): ------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA. BY SPL. GOVERNMENT PLEADER M.L.SAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- SRI.VACHAL PUTHEN PURAYIL, ITTIYATH, THONDERNAD AMSOM, KUNHOME DESOM (THROUGH THONDERNAD) *ADDL. R2 TO R8 IMPLEADED 2. NARAYANAN, VACHALIL HOUSE, P.O.VALAD, MANANTHAVADY. 3. VISWAMBARAN, VACHAL PUTHENPURAYIL HOUSE, THONDERNADU P.O., KARIMPIL, MANANTHAVADY. 4. THANKAMANI, W/O. KARUNAKARAN, MEKKAYIL HOUSE, CHEMPILODE, EDAVAKA (PO) MANANTHAVADY. 5. LAKSHMIKUTTY, W/O. SASIDHARAN, PUTHENPURAYIL HOUSE, KANIYARAM P.O., MANANTHAVADY. 6. SULOCHANA, W/. PONNAPPAN, VACHAL HOUSE, VALAD P.O., MANANTHAVADY. 7. SHAJI, S/.O. PONNAPPAN, VACHAL HOUSE, P.O. VALAD, MANANTHAVADY . 8. SAJI, S/O. PONNAPPAN, PERAMBRA. *ADDL. R2 TO R8 ARE IMPLEADED AS LEGAL HEIRS OF THE DECEASED IST RESPONDENT AS PER ORDER DTD. 4.6.09 IN IA. 378/04 IN CRP. 3148/00. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J ------------------------------------- C.R.P No.3148 OF 2000 -------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of February 2010 ORDER Revision has been filed by the State against the order of the Taluk Land Board, Mananthavady challenging the exemption granted to the declarant in the proceeding numbered as T.L.B No.949 of 1973/Mananthavady. The declarant in the above proceeding had passed away after the passing of the impugned order by the Taluk Land Board, and in the revision, his legal heirs have been impleaded as additional respondents 2 to 8. Though notice was served on those respondents, none of them has entered appearance. 2. Short facts involved in the case are thus: The declarant Sri.Vachal Puthen Purayil Ittiyath had filed a statement under Section 85A of the Kerala Land Reforms Act. The statement filed to the State Land Board was transmitted to the Taluk Land Board, North Wayanad which has jurisdiction to entertain the matter. After considering all the aspects, the Land Board passed an order fixing the area to be surrendered by the declarant and his family as 2.83 acres comprised in R.S No.42/1F. Exemption was provided over two items of properties which had been gifted by the declarant to his two sons and another item of 1.50 acres in R.S No.42/1F which was planted with coffee. Apart from the exemption of the above items, a property comprising the building site having an extent of 71 cents and C.R.P No.3148 OF 2000 Page numbers another having additional extent of 67 cents were also granted exemption. After excluding the lands exempted, an area of 2.83 acres in R.S No.42/1 was fixed as the area to be surrendered and the land was taken possession by the Tahsildar, Mananthavady. Later, the Taluk Land Board reopened the case as per Section 85(9)A of the Kerala Land Reforms Act on the ground for the exemption of 1 acre in R.S No.42/1F was given without sufficient proof that the land was cultivated with coffee prior to 01/04/1964. After collecting a report from the Special Deputy Tahsildar in which that officer expressed a view that it was planted with coffee prior to 01/04/1964 the order impugned in the revision was passed by the Taluk Land Board holding that the declarant is eligible to get exemption of the above land under Section 81 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act as it was a plantation cultivated with coffee prior to 01/04/1964. Propriety and correctness of that order is challenged in the revision. 3. I heard the learned Government Pleader. It is submitted that the revenue authority, Special Deputy Tahsildar deputed in the present case by the Taluk Land Board, has no competency or authority to state that the land involved was a coffee plantation prior to 01/04/1964. Exemption over the land as a coffee plantation prior to 01/04/1964 is something within the special knowledge of the declarant and it has to be established by him by cogent and convincing material and documentary evidence to claim such C.R.P No.3148 OF 2000 Page numbers exemption, is the submission of the learned Government Pleader. The case was reopened to examine whether the exemption granted earlier in respect of 1 acre of land as coffee plantation with coffee cultivated prior to 01/04/1964 was correct or not. When that be so, the reopening proceedings cannot be closed only on the basis of a report of the Special Deputy Tahsildar opining that the land was planted with coffee prior to 01/04/1964. The declarant has not produced any material to show it was so to claim exemption of the land, is the submission of the learned Government Pleader. I find considerable force in the submission made by the learned Government Pleader. Only on the basis of the report of the authorised officer, it is not possible to conclude that the land prior to 01/04/1964 was cultivated with coffee, and thus the declarant was entitled to exemption under the provisions of the Act. The Land Board, it is seen, has not examined the claim of exemption canvassed in accordance with the provisions of the Act and that being so, the impugned order cannot be sustained. Setting aside the order, the Land Board is directed to reexamine the matter afresh and dispose the proceedings in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible at any rate, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Sd/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE //TRUE COPY// vdv P.A TO JUDGE