IMPORTANT POINT
The court ruled that the petitioners failed to prove their possession of land and that the authority to assign such land lies with the District Collector under the Kannan Devan Hills Act.

JUDGMENT :

Muralee Krishna, J.

1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioners seeking a writ of mandamus directing the 3^rd respondent Tahsildar, Devikulam to consider Exts.P2 to P2(h) applications for the assignment of land submitted by the petitioners and assign 0.03 cents of property each in survey No.912 of Kannan Devan Hills Village to the petitioners.

2. Going by the averments in the writ petition, the petitioners are landless persons. They belong to scheduled caste community, and they are enjoying the possession of 0.03 cents of landed property each in Kannan Devan Hills Village from 1998 onwards. The petitioners have no other land except the small extent of land covered by Ext.P1 certificate issued by the 5^th respondent. On 9.4.2004 the petitioners submitted applications for assignment before the 3^rd respondent under Rule 11(8) of the Kerala Land Assignment Rules, 1964 , in the prescribed form. But even after the lapse of considerable time, the 3^rd respondent did not pass any order on Ext.P2 to P2(h) applications submitted by the petitioners.The petitioners also submitted Ext.P3 to P3(h) applications before the Munnar Grama Panchayat for a building permit. Aggrieved by the inordinate delay in considering the application for building permit, petitioners approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.12455 of 2015. On 10.04.2015 this Court disposed of that writ petition directing the Munnar Grama Panchayath to consider and dispose of Exts.P3 to P3(h) representations within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Since there was non-compliance on Ext.P4 judgment, the petitioners filed a contempt of court case and the same is pending before this Court. However, the 4^th respondent threatened the petitioner and demolished their respective sheds without serving any notice. Since petitioners had no other land, they again constructed their sheds and resided there. The applications of the petitioners for assignment are pending before the 3^rd respondent. But the 4^th respondent unnecessarily harassing and threatening to evict the petitioner forcefully. Hence the petitioners approached this Court by filing this writ petition.

3. The 4^th respondent Special Tahsildar, Revenue Department filed a counter affidavit dated 24.02.2016 producing therewith Exts.R4(a) to R4(c) documents. Paragraphs 2 to 5 of that counter affidavit read thus:

“2. It is submitted that the land in question is Government puramboke land comprised in Sy.No.912 of KDH Village. The land is under the custody of KSHB and it is under the supervision of the 4^th respondent. The land is kept for KSHB purpose, and it is free land without any structure for years.

3. The Certificates produced by the petitioners as exhibits are forged ad created by the petitioners. The 2^nd respondent as per his Proceedings No.E2.40384/99 dated 16.08.2001 has ordered to cancel all old cases of Possession Certificates issued and had given one month to submit application for ratification. If ratification has not been made within one month, the Certificates will stand cancelled. No ratification is seen made in the Certificates produced by the petitioners as exhibits. A true copy of the Proceedings No.E2.40384/99 dated 16.08.2001 of the District Collector, Idukki is produced herewith and may be marked as Exhibit R4(a).

4. It is submitted that no structure has been there in the land in question for several years and the land under the custody of KSHB and under the supervision of the 4^th respondent. The petitioners have approached the Hon'ble Court with forged documents created by them and their action should not have to be entertained at any cost. This Hon'ble Court had dismissed W.P.(C)No.14013/2013 by judgment dated 12.07.2013 in the light of similar facts. A true copy of the judgment dated 12.07.2013 in W.P.(C)No.14013/2013 of the Hon'ble Court is produced herewith and may be marked as Ext.R4(b). Hence, the attempt of the petitioners to