P. Mohammed and Abdul Rahiman vs The State of Kerala and Others

Antony Dominic, J.—Petitioners submit that they are in possession of 4.89 acres of land in Survey No. 2/1A part of Edakkot Pavukkonam area of Anangannadi village of Ottapalam Taluk. According to the petitioners, in Suo Motu Proceedings No. 624/1977, purchase certificate No. 3511/77 was issued to the petitioners'' father as early as on 13-09-1977.

It is submitted that after the expiry of their father, show cause notice dated 27-08-1992 was issued by the Land Tribunal, Ottapalam and thereafter, by order dated 26-06-1998, the purchase certificate was cancelled. That order of the Land Tribunal was challenged before this Court in O.P. No. 12932/1998. That original petition was disposed of by Ext.P3 judgment rendered on 14-12-2007, setting aside the order dated 26-06-1998 cancelling the purchase certificate and directing the Land Tribunal to reconsider the matter. According to the petitioners, the issue is now pending consideration before the Land Tribunal and in the meanwhile, respondents are trying to take over possession of the property from the petitioners. With this apprehension, the writ petition is filed.

Counsel for the petitioners invites my attention to Ext.P3 and submits that as mentioned in the judgment and even as on date, the respondents have not issued any notification, declaring the property as a vested forest under the Vesting and Assignment Act, 1971. It is stated that, therefore, and especially having regard to the pendency of the matter before the Land Tribunal, Ottapalam, the respondents should not be permitted to take over possession of the property.

Admittedly, the proceedings are still pending before the Land Tribunal and the case of the petitioner is that so the property has not been notified as a vested forest. If this be the factual position, petitioner will be entitled to retain possession of the property at least till the Land Tribunal takes a decision in the matter.

Therefore, writ petition is disposed of, directing that if the factual position is as above, status quo as on today with respect of the possession of the property shall be maintained and that the parties will be governed by the orders to be passed by the Land Tribunal in the suo motu proceedings mentioned above.

It is made clear that this judgment will not stand in the way of the respondents in taking action if there is a notification already issued under the Vesting Act or even for the issuance of any such notification.

Petitioner to produce a copy of this judgment and writ petition before the third respondent for compliance.