KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
Mary Baby, W/o. Baby K. C. – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala, Represented By The Secretary To The Department Of Revenue – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Kauser Edappagath, J.) :
Ext.P12 order passed by the 4th respondent rejecting Ext.P4 application submitted by the petitioner to issue pass to cut, remove and transport teak trees planted by her in her property is under challenge in this writ petition.
2. The petitioner is the owner of 0.072 hectares of land comprised in Survey No.1397/146/1 situated in Peechi Village. She obtained the said property by way of assignment under the Kerala Government Land Assignment Act, 1960 (for short 'the Land Assignment Act') as per Ext.P1 patta. According to the petitioner, after she acquired the right over the property as per Ext.P1, she planted around 150 teak trees therein. Since a neighbour has been complaining that the trees are a threat to his house, she decided to cut and remove them, and she submitted Ext.P4 application before the 3rd respondent seeking permission to cut the trees and to issue a pass to transport the same. The 3rd respondent asked the petitioner to approach the revenue authorities. Accordingly, she submitted Ext.P6 application seeking permission to cut and remove the teak trees before the 4th respondent. The 4th respondent rejected the Ext.P6 application as per
Article 48A in part IV of Constitution of India dealing with a duty is cast upon State for 'protection and improvement of environment and safeguarding of forests and wildlife', of country.
The absence of statutory provisions prohibits government claims over trees planted post-property assignment.
The main legal point established is that the petitioner's rights under the title deed were modified by the Kerala Grants and Leases (Modification of Rights) Act, 1980, and the petitioner is liable to....
The State retains absolute ownership of trees on assigned land, and cutting without permission constitutes an offense under the relevant rules.
The court upheld the damages for illegal tree cutting, emphasizing revenue authorities can't impose fines, and the need for fair assessment of damages considering the petitioner's circumstances.
A writ of certiorari cannot be issued to enforce rights under repealed rules; legal rights must be based on current statutory provisions.
Assignment of land - A person who is having a registered holding and who requires adjoining government land for beneficial enjoyment of his registered holding can be granted assignment of government ....
When a land is assigned specifically, the holder of the land cannot use it for any other purpose, even without a specific stipulation in the patta conditions.
The court affirmed that only the District Collector has the authority to assign land under the Kannan Devan Hills Act, rendering any patta issued by an unauthorized officer invalid.
Government land designated for public use cannot be assigned for private benefit, affirming jurisdictional integrity in administrative orders.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.