A. Hariprasad, J.

Writ Petition filed by the appellant was dismissed by the learned Single Judge. Following reliefs were sought therein:

"i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, calling for the records leading to Exts.P1 and P5 and quash the same;

ii) Allow the applications for assignment of 33 cents of land in R.S.601/5 (old Sy.No.241/2) of Cheranelloor Village which forms part of the pond as per Ext.P1 survey sketch pending as per Exts.P1 to P4, P6 & P8 in accordance with Kerala Land Acquisition Act read with Rules:

iii) Issue such other and further reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case;

and iv) Award cost to the petitioner."

2. Brief averments in the petition, necessary for disposal of this case, are the following: Appellant's father deceased Abdul Rauf had ancestral properties in Cheranellur Village. His father had given about 1.5 acres of land in the same Village to 15 kudikidappukars under the provisions of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963. Another 16 cents belonging to him was acquired for NH 17. Appellant's father had eight children, out of which seven are alive, including the appellant. It is the contention that the appellant and each one of his siblings will only get less than 10 cents of land as inherited property. In the middle of the property owned by the appellant's father in Sy. No.241/2 (R.S.No.601/5) of Cheranallur Village, there was a pond having an area of 33 cents. All the properties around the said pond belonged to the ancestors of the appellant. The pond was in the possession of the family of the appellant for more than four decades. During rainy season, the pond will be fully covered with water. During summer, mixed crops were cultivated known as 'kondal cultivation'.

3. Appellant's father applied for assignment of the pond in the year 1981. The proceedings were kept in abeyance by the authorities along with other similar applications. Appellant's father again made an application on 20.04.1994 (Ext.P10) and at the instance of the Revenue Authorities another application was submitted on 21.07.1994 (Ext.P11). So many reminders were also sent by appellant's father requesting for assignment of lands. Pending decision on the applications, appellant's father died. Then, appellant's mother submitted another application on 14.12.2000 (Ext.P14). No decision was taken by the authorities till the death of appellant's mother on 07.12.2004. Thereafter, appellant and his siblings jointly filed representations before the 1st respondent on 11.01.2006 (Ext.P16).

4. Appellant approached this Court many a times seeking directions to the respondents for considering his application for land assignment. Ultimately Exts.P1 and P5 orders were passed. They are arbitrary, illegal and vitiated by non application of mind. Hence the writ petition was filed seeking the above mentioned reliefs.

5. 2nd respondent filed a counter affidavit. Contentions therein, stated shortly, are the following: Neither the appellant nor his predecessors have any right to claim assignment of land. As per the revenue records of Cheranallur Village, 33 cents of land comprised in R.S.No.601/5 is classified as 'kulam puramboke' (pond). The said land is in the possession of Government and it is bounded by a Panchayat road, leading to NH 17, on the southern side and private properties on all the three other sides. Appellant has no land adjacent to the kulam puramboke. The said land is not suitable for agricultural purpose. Appellant is not entitled for assignment of land. Writ petition is filed suppressing the facts that the appellant is not in possession of the land and the land had already been handed over to the evictees for International Container Transshipment Terminal Project ("ICTT", for short). Fact that the evictees had already been issued with assignment orders has also been suppressed by the appellant. Besides, they have started construction