Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 32915
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
S.MANIKUMAR, CJ, Murali Purushothaman, J
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – Appellant
Versus
THE REGISTRAR, KERALA LOKAYUKTA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 25270 OF 2019
For the Appellants/Petitioners: K.P.HARISH
For the Respondents: SRI.RAM MOHAN.G., SRI.G.P.SHINOD, SRI.GOVIND PADMANAABHAN, SRI.AJIT G ANJARLEKAR
The Lok Ayukta lacks jurisdiction over property disputes, which must be addressed through civil court processes and relevant statutory remedies.
Headnote:(A) Kerala Lok Ayukta Act, 1999 - Sections 2(a), 2(b), 2(d), 7(2), 8(2)(c) - Writ petition challenging the Lok Ayukta's order directing re-survey and mutation of property ownership - Court found the complaint was not maintainable as it involved allegations falling outside the jurisdiction of the Lok Ayukta, and suitable remedies were available under various land-related statutes - Directions made by the Lok Ayukta exceeded its authority. (Paras 1-28)
(B) Jurisdiction of Lok Ayukta - Lok Ayukta cannot adjudicate disputes relating to property titles or investments since they fall within the purview of civil courts or other administrative remedies. (Para 24)
(C) Jurisdictional Limits - Complaints on issues settled before civil courts or barred by time limits under applicable laws are non-justiciable by the Lok Ayukta. (Paras 25, 26)
Facts of the case:
The petitioners, District Collector and Tahsildar, contested the Lok Ayukta's order directing property reassessment based on alleged maladministration linked to property ownership disputes raised by complainants claiming ownership of land erroneously identified as public land (puramboke).
Findings of Court:
The order by the Lok Ayukta was set aside as outside its jurisdiction, confirming that petitioners' claims and the legal issues resolved were to be addressed within the established civil law frameworks.
Issues: Whether the Lok Ayukta had the jurisdiction to adjudicate the property dispute relating to maladministration allegations; whether the complaint fell within statutory time limits for investigations.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the Lok Ayukta could not entertain the complaint as the issues pertained to civil rights and the petitioners had not exhausted the appropriate legal remedies, underscoring the limits of the authority of the Lok Ayukta in matters involving civil disputes.
Result: Writ petition allowed, Lok Ayukta order set aside.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge of lok ayukta's order. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. allegation of maladministration and ownership. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. petitioners' arguments against lok ayukta's jurisdiction. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. evidence evaluation and procedural adherence. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. legal definitions under the lok ayukta act. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 6. limitations and procedural bars on complaints. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 7. effect of jurisdiction on complaint sustainability. (Para 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 8. order set aside due to jurisdictional excess. (Para 28) |
JUDGMENT
S. Manikumar, CJ
Instant writ petition is filed by the District Collector and Tahsildar (LR), Thiruvananthapuram, challenging the order passed by the Kerala Lok Ayukta in Complaint No.958/13-D dated 10.01.2019, by which, the Competent Authority was directed to issue appropriate directions to the Tahsildar (LR), Varkala, to assign fresh re-survey number to the residential property of late complainant, the legal representatives of whom are additional complaints 2 to 4, the extent of which is already ascertained by measurement, by the Tahsildar (LR), Varkala, and identified also, as having proper boundary walls on all its sides.
2. It was also directed to cause mutation of those properties being effected in the joint names of additional complaints 2 to 4, who are legal heirs of the deceased 1 st complainant, and receive tax from them for those properties, for the period after 2003 upto which, tax was already received, and redress the grievance of the complainants.
3. It was further directed that the competent authority is recommended to take appropriate action against one Mr. M. P. Premlal, Tahsildar (LR), Varkala, for the malpractice, malevolence and mis-deeds perpetrated by him, with a view to harass the complainants whether with or without any ultimate motives and in giving false evidence to substantiate his stand. The Lok Ayukta also observed in the said order that retaining such persons in service is a menace to the Society and a loss to the public exchequer.
4. The relief sought for in the writ petition is as under:
5. Respondents 3 to 5 herein are the legal heirs of one Smt. P. Usha, the original complainant before the Kerala Lok Ayukta.
6. Facts in nutshell are; in Exhibit-P2 complaint, the complainant has alleged maladministration by the officials in connection with the rectification of mistakes that occurred in the survey records in respect of Old Sy. Nos. 2684/A/2, 2686/A/2 and 2684/A of Navayikulam village. The complainant had claimed absolute ownership, possession, and enjoyment of 1 acre of land in the aforementioned survey numbers, which she had obtained, by virtue of a gift deed dated 26.01.1978 executed by her mother and was paying land tax thereof, from 1978 till 2003 after effecting mutation. According to the complainant, the boundaries of the property have been demarcated by mount and boundary stones constructed several years back.
7. It is the further case of the complainant before the Lok Ayukta that the survey authorities recorded an extent of 34 3/4 cents illlegally and deliberately, out of the total 1 acre of land, as puramboke by demarcating it in three survey records, without issuing any notice or informing the complainant, the act of which is a clear misuse of official power. Therefore, the complainant sought for prayers to the effect of directing appropriate action to get rectifying the defects in the resurvey records of the complainant.
8. In fact, in Exhibit-P2 complaint itself, it was stated by the complainant that upon a notification issued by the survey authorities, as regards the final resurvey records of Navayikulam Village, which was published on 17.04.2004, an Adalath was conducted to redress the c
