Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S., JJ
VINCY CHERIAN S/o. LATE CHERIAN – Appellant
Versus
DISTRICT COLLECTOR – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Anil K. Narendran, J.
The petitioners have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P7 order dated 07.11.2018 of the 4th respondent Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Revenue (R) Department, whereby Ext.P4 representation dated 14.09.2017 made by the petitioners for assignment of 99.61 Acres of Government land in Survey Nos.229/1, 2 and 3 of Anaviratty Village in Devikulam Taluk in Idukki District stands rejected for the reasons stated therein. The said representation is one filed by the petitioners after Ext.P1 judgment dated 15.11.2013 of the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.2090 of 2004, which was followed by Ext.P2 order dated 29.01.2014 in R.P.No.50 of 2014, arising out of that judgment. Ext.P4 representation was directed to be considered by Ext.P5 judgment dated 27.03.2018 of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C)No.39322 of 2017. The further relief sought for in this writ petition is a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents not to allot/assign the land in question to third parties; and a declaration that the petitioners are entitled to be allotted and assigned the land as claimed
A writ of certiorari cannot be issued to enforce rights under repealed rules; legal rights must be based on current statutory provisions.
A writ of mandamus requires a legal right and statutory duty, and cannot be issued contrary to law.
The court ruled that procedural fairness requires an opportunity for the Petitioner to contest against unjust limitations on land assignment rights.
The authority's decision to deny land assignment based on public utility and the petitioner's inability to prove necessity upheld, despite jurisdictional concerns.
Government land designated for public use cannot be assigned for private benefit, affirming jurisdictional integrity in administrative orders.
The absence of a non-alienation clause in the original land assignment means it cannot be classified as assigned land under the A.P. Assigned Lands Act, allowing for its registration.
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 established that adherence to procedural requirements in eviction proceedings under the A.P. Assigned Land Prohibition of Transfers Act is essential for the validity of such orders.
Under the Kannan Devan Hills Act, mere inclusion in an eligibility list does not confer the right to land assignment without adequate proof of claims, and procedural correctness in rejection must be ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
