High CourtsSingle Bench(2012) 06 KL CK 0120

Narayanikutty, Represented By Her Power Of Attorney Holder C.K. Sivadasan and Others vs The Chief Conservator of Forests, Office of The Chief Conservator of Forests, Government Secretariat, Trivandrum-695 001, The Custodian, Ex-Officio Special Secretary, Agriculture (Forest Special) Department, The Custodian of National Forests, Calicut-673020 and State of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 6 June 2012

HON’BLE JUDGES
T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (C) . No. 10834 of 2012 (D)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 496 words

T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.—The petitioners, 10 in number, are aggrieved by the delay in restoration of property covered by Exhibit P1 order passed by the Forest Tribunal, Kozhikode. Petitioners 1 to 5 are legal heirs of late Govindankutty Nair and late Janaki Amma. Sri Govindankutty Nair was the owner of 1 Acre 73 cents of property in Keralassery Village in Palakkad District. Upon the death of Sri Govindankutty Nair and Smt.Janaki Amma, property devolved upon petitioners 1 to 5. The petitioners 6 to 10 are the wife and children and legal heirs late Madhavan Nair, who was the owner of 1 Acre 85 cents of property in the same Village. He also died intestate. The properties of late Govindankutty Nair and late Madhavan Nair were notified as private forest, which led to the respective parties approaching the Forest Tribunal, Kozhikode by filing O.A. No. 655/74 and 656/74 respectively, which were disposed of along with O.A. No. 657/74 and O.A. No. 658/74 by the Forest Tribunal as per Exhibit P1. It appears that subsequent to the pronouncement of the order, amendment of the Original Applications happened to be filed with regard to the correction of the extent of property and schedule of OAs. which was allowed by the Forest Tribunal as per Exhibit P2 order dated 26.4.1997. This is the background of the litigation, the petitioners have pleaded herein.

2.

The petitioners have produced various representations in the matter, wherein they have sought restoration of the property.

3.

Exhibits P8 and P9 are the communications issued from the Chief Conservator and the Government respectively, which will show that the actions in the matter are in progress, but failing to get any positive action leading to restoration, the petitioners have approached this Court by filing this Writ Petition.

4.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader.

5.

The learned counsel for the petitioners brought to my notice a letter, No. 27244/E2/89 F &WLD dated 31.1.1990 addressed to the Custodian of the Conservator of Vested Forests, Kozhikode, wherein the Government has directed to restore possession of the area involved in O.S. No. 655/74 to 658/74 to its ex-owners.

6.

The learned Government Pleader submitted that the said communication is dated 31.1.1990 and it was thereafter that Exhibit P2 order was passed by the Forest Tribunal. Therefore the matter requires proper approval by the Government and proposals have been forwarded to the Government for approval and for issuance of consequent notification in the matter, it is submitted. Since all the steps are in the final stage, there will be a direction to the Government to take appropriate action to approve the proposals and publish consequent notification. The entire action will be finalised and the properties involved will be restored to the petitioners within a period of six months from the date of production of a copy of the judgment, along with a copy of the Writ Petition.

The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.