IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST AUGUST 2011 / 9TH BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 22710 of 2011(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ CHENTHAMARAKANNAN, S/O.LATE MUTHU, RESIDING AT KOLAKKAMPADOM HOUSE, VEMBALUR, PALAKKAD - 678 502. BY ADV. SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN SMT.GEETHA P.MENON SRI.P.B.SUBRAMANYAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE TALUK LAND BOARD, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD - 678 541. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD - 678 001. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. SR.GOVT.PLEADER SMT.M.J.RAJASREE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.22710/11 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: DATED 12.1.93, TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN C.C.1257/1973 OF THE TALUK LANDBOARD, ALATHUR. EXT.P2: DATED NIL, TRUE COPY OF BASIC TAX REGISTER FROM THE THEKURUSSI II VILLAGE. EXT.P3: DATED 6.6.06, TRUE COPY of THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, THENKURUSSI II. EXT.P4: DATED 7.7.06, TRUE COPY of THE OWNERSHIP CERTIFIED ISSUED FROM THENKURUSI GRAMA PANCHAYAT. EXT.P5: DATED 5.3.11 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.75 ISSUED FROM THE THENKURUSSI GRAMA PANCHAYAT. EXT.P6: DATED NIL, TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER REQUESTING TO SURRENDER ALTERNATE LAND. EXT.P7: DATED 4.5.2010 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.F2-9526/93(2) BY THE ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR. EXT.P8: DATED 24.4.2010, TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.C.C.1257/73 OF RESPONDENT NO.1. EXT.P9: DATED 14.2.11, TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.L.R.A.2- 2006/36591/9 OF RESPONDENT NO.2. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 22710 OF 2011 ===================== Dated this the 31st day of August, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the son of Muthu, the declarant in C.C.NO.1257/1973. In that proceedings, the 1st respondent passed Ext.P1 order dated 12/1/93, in which three items of properties were held as excess land to be surrendered. This included 0.26 acres of land in Sy.No.49/3 of Vemballur Village. This order has become final. 2. According to the petitioner, in Sy.No.49/3, his family has a larger extent of land consequent on resurvey and that their residential house is also situated in the said property. Therefore petitioner submitted Ext.P6 to the 2nd respondent requesting that while identifying the property to be surrendered in pursuance to Ext.P1, his residential house should be excluded. 3. On that application, Ext.P7 report was submitted by the Additional Tahsildar, recommending exclusion of the residential house as sought for by the petitioner. However, Exts.P8 and P9 orders were passed by respondents 1 and 2 rejecting the request of the petitioner solely on the ground that WPC No. 22710/11 :2 : Ext.P1 order was passed way back on 12/1/1993. 4. It is in these circumstances, this writ petition has been filed seeking to quash Exts.P8 and P9 orders referred to above and with the further prayer, which reads as under:- “ issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to take possession of 0.26 acres in Sy.No.49/3 of Vemballur Village pursuant to Ext.P1 in such manner as to exclude the residential building of the petitioner and immediately appurtenant land”. 5. As already seen, the petitioner is not disputing his liability to surrender the land as ordered in Ext.P1. On the otherhand, all that the petitioner seeks is that while identifying the property to be surrendered, his residential house may be excluded. 6. In my view, the request made by the petitioner is a deserving one and there is no reason why it should have been rejected. In the light of the directions contained in Ext.P1, the liability of the authorities is only to ensure that the extent of property in the specified survey number is surrendered, and so long as that is ensured, the fact that the land with the residential house is excluded, cannot be of any consequence. WPC No. 22710/11 :3 : Therefore, quashing Exts.P8 and P9, I dispose of this writ petition directing the respondents to take possession of the property as ordered in Ext.P1 excluding the residential building. It is clarified that if for any reason, the property in Sy.No.49/3 is found to be inadequate, it will be open to the petitioner to surrender equivalent extent of adjacent property, and if such an offer is made, that will also be accepted. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp