IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 18TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 27TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 24459 of 2009(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. CHANGAMALLY PADINJARETHIL ALIKUTTY GURUKKAL, S/O. KUNHALAN GURUKKAL,PAZHOOR POST TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. KUNHUMOIDEEN KUTTY GURUKKAL S/O. KUNHALAN GURUKKAL,PAZHOOR POST TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. PETITIONERS ARE REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER CHANGAMPALLY PADINJARETHIL GURUKKAL 67 YEAR OF AGE, PAZHOOR POST,TIRUR TALUK,MALAPPURAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN SMT.A.R.PRAVITHA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE TALUK LAND BOARD TIRUR REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, TIRUR. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER NADUVATTOM, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 4. ENUDHEEN, S/O.VEERALI HAJI POTTAMMEL, VAKAYIL,PAZHOOR POST, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. R1 TO R3 BY SPL. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.M.L.SAJEEVAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.24459 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of September, 2009 JUDGMENT 1.Claiming entitled to the benefit of Section 7-E of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963, as amended by Act 21 of 2006, the petitioners state to have filed applications before the Taluk Land Board under the rules which enable adjudication of such claims. The petitioners have founded their claims on the basis of certain agreements or transfers which, on facts, is criticized by the learned Government Pleader as transactions calculated to defeat the ceiling provisions. It is pointed out that the petitioners would be disentitled to sustain their claims in view of the provisos to sub-section 4 of Section 84 of the KLR Act. 2. This writ petition came up for consideration on 25.8.2009 and as of now, there are interlocutory orders requiring status quo to be maintained. Learned Government Pleader states that dispossession has already been taken. This fact is stated in the WPC.24459/09 Page numbers writ petition also. Therefore, the status quo available as on the date on which the interim orders were passed is that the possession was with the State. 3.That by itself is insufficient for the Taluk Land Board to refuse adjudication. Obviously, the Taluk Land Board has to adjudicate on the issue having regard to the provisions in Section 84(4) and 7-E of the KLR Act. All that has to be done is that the matter is expedited, more so, because the Government appear to contend that the transactions now held out by the petitioners were intended to defeat the ceiling provisions. It is also recorded that the learned Government Pleader submits that the alleged transferrer of the petitioners had filed a revision petition before this Court, after 10 years of the proceedings before the Taluk Land Board. 4.Taking the aforesaid matters into consideration and preserving the order of status quo as noticed above, this writ petition is ordered directing that the petitioners' application for WPC.24459/09 Page numbers adjudication of the claim under Section 7-E shall be disposed of by the Taluk Land Board in accordance with law, after hearing the necessary parties, within an outer limit of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. All issues on merits are left open. Adjudication and disposal by the Taluk Land Board will be untrammelled by anything stated in this judgment. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.22/9.