J.B. Koshy, J.

This Writ Petition is filed by the All India Lawyers Union, Kerala State Committee as a public interest litigation challenging Ext.P2 order of Taluk Land Board, Kozhikode in so far as it exempted 35 acres of land from the property owned by late P.V. Sami and family in the suo motu land revision case. Petitioner has also arrayed as respondent Mr.M. Ratna Singh, Advocate General and Mr. Rajan Joseph, Additional Advocate General by name as respondents 3 and 4 in this case imputing mala fides and impropriety on their parts. Apart from the prayer for issuing a writ of certiorari for quashing Ext.P2 there was also a prayer for directing the State Government to take appropriate steps by filing a regular Civil Revision Petition to protect Government land from being given to unauthorized persons. Shri. G. Janardhana Kurup, a very senior member of the Bar argued on behalf of the petitioner. We have heard Senior Government Pleader M. Ajay for respondents 1 to 4 at the time of admission stage itself. Apart from questioning the maintainability of the Writ Petition challenging the order of the Taluk Land Board and locus standi of the petitioner to challenge the same, respondents also denied all allegations made in the Writ Petition.

2. Before we consider the contentions raised in the Writ Petition, we may refer to the brief facts of the case S.83 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act 1963 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) provides that no persons shall be entitled to own or possess lands in excess of the ceiling area with effect from 1st January, 1970 (notified date). S.82 fixes ceiling area for family as well as individual persons. S.81 exempts certain lands from the purview of ceiling area. Lands occupied by educational institutions including land necessary for the convenient use of the institutions and playgrounds attached are also exempt as per S.81(1)(r) of the Act. S.85 of the Act deals with surrender of excess lands. The scheme of the Act as can be seen from S.96 shows that excess land surrendered is mainly intended for distributing the same to the landless agricultural labourers and smallholders. S.96(1A) also gives power to use such surrendered land for any public purposes. Family of Sri. P.V. Sami and his wife Smt. P.V. Madhavi were holding a total of 77.5 acres of land in Kozhikode Taluk. Suo motu proceedings was taken against the family of the assessee Shri P.V. Sami under the above provisions and draft statement was issued provisionally fixing excess land as 63.35 acres. After hearing objections, the Taluk Land Board passed a final Order on 27th June, 1986 excluding an extent of 68.50 acres out of the total extent of 77.75 acres possessed.

3. State filed Revision Petition against the above order before this Court under S.103 of the Act. By Ext.P1 Order in C.R.P. No.1333 of 1987, one of us (Justice J.B. Koshy), sitting single, remanded the matter with regard to 35 acres found by the Land Board as transferred before the relevant date and which was in possession of the School Committee in which Shri. P.V. Sami himself was the Vice-President and also 8.5 acres said to have been given on lease to Smt. Kamalam, daughter of the declarant. While remanding the matter, this Court observed as follows in Ext.P1 order:

“No document is produced to show that the School was in possession of this land before 1970 and the exact extent of land actually in possession of the school even if the school was in possession of the property. Since the Taluk Land Board did not advert to these facts the finding regarding the exclusion of 35 acres of land has to be set aside and it has to be reconsidered after giving notice to the concerned parties.”

With regard to 8.5 acres of land also, this Court found as follows:

“The Taluk Land Board has to reconsider the same after giving notice to the parties. The parties can adduce evidence to prove their claim.”

The order of the Taluk Land Board with regard to other portions of the land was upheld