An unqualified possession certificate does not prevent the Government from exercising its rights under law if violations are alleged.

1. These two writ appeals arise from a common judgment passed by the learned Single Judge in two separate independent writ petitions which had raised a common issue of law. W.A.No.564/17 arises from W.P.(C)28877/16 whereas W.A.612/17 arises from W.P.(C)7365/16. State is in appeal in both the cases and the writ petitioners are the respondents.

2. We have heard learned Additional Advocate General in support of both the appeals and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents in these writ appeals and with their consent, we are disposing of the writ appeals at this stage itself.

3. The writ petitioners had purchased certain lands and had sought possession certificates from the concerned Village Officer / Tahsildar. Insofar as W.P.(C)No.28877/16 is concerned, the possession certificate was not issued, which occasioned filing of W.A.564/17. In W.P.(C)7365/16, the possession certificate was issued, but with an endorsement that it was a part of exempted plantation in terms of the Kerala Land Reforms Act. The reason for refusal to issue possession certificate was that the land had been purchased for setting up an educational institution and it being an exempted land as a plantation, such a possession certificate for any other purpose could not be issued in the light of Ext.P4 communication dated 25.2.2015 issued by the Secretary, Land Board.

4. The learned Single Judge, after hearing the parties, allowed the writ petitions and directed issuance of possession certificates to the writ petitioners without any adverse entry or endorsement thereon. Being aggrieved by this direction State is in appeal in both the cases.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that the direction as given by the learned Single Judge requires no interference inasmuch as the possession certificate would disclose only the owner and the possession of the property. Whether the property is an exempted property or its user is restricted which cannot be changed would be a matter that would separately come up for consideration as the occasion may arise by its user, by the purchaser or by any other person. That would be an independent issue to be decided as and when it arises. Those proceedings would have to be initiated if at all in accordance with the provisions of the Kerala Land Reforms Act or any other law applicable to the situation. But the occasion would only arise later, when any other user in violation of exemption is alleged. The person will have his own defence to those. Those proceedings cannot be pre - empted by any adverse entry in the possession certificate. In other words, an unqualified certificate would not fetter the right of the Government in taking any action, if they are of the view that any law is being violated. That right is always reserved to the Government.

6. With these modifications / clarifications, these appeals stand disposed of.

All pending I.As. shall stand closed.