A government order on property transaction under Section 120A of the K.L.R. Act found unsustainable due to lack of ownership basis.

J U D G M E N T

Dated this the 5^th day of February, 2026 Petitioners are aggrieved by Ext.P5 Order issued by the District Collector under Section 120A of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 ('K.L.R. Act', for short), which prevented a proposed transaction of the petitioners in respect of the subject property in favour of a third party. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Senior Government Pleader. Perused the records.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the reasons which weighed with the learned Single Judges in Exts.P8 and P9 judgments, to frown upon similar orders passed under Section 120A of the K.L.R. Act, would squarely cover the instant Ext.P5 Order as well. Ext.P5 Order is in the teeth of Exts.P8 and P9 judgments, is the point argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners. Petitioners seek similar reliefs.

4. Learned Senior Government Pleader would submit that Ext.P5 was passed pursuant to a requisition made by the Taluk Land Board, Vythiri, as could be seen from the reference in Ext.P5. When the sale of the properties which is the subject matter of a ceiling proceeding, vide T.L.B.No.30/81/V is contemplated, the Collector is well within his limits to pass Orders under Section 120A of the K.L.R. Act, is the argument advanced by the learned Senior Government Pleader.

5. This Court queried the learned Government Pleader as to whether the requisition made by the Taluk Land Board, Vythiri, is available, whereupon, a copy of the requisition is handed over. A perusal of the same would indicate that what has been requisitioned in the letter dated 30.07.2016 (cited as reference in Ext.P5) is in respect of the land held by M/s.Poddar Plantations Ltd. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners properties was not owned by the M/s.Poddar Plantations as on the date of issuance of the letter by the Taluk Land Board.

6. Taking stock of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Senior Government Pleader, this Court finds that Ext.P5 cannot be sustained. As already indicated, transactions of the properties sought to be curbed is in respect of the properties covered held by M/s.Poddar Plantations. As on the date of requisition made by the Taluk Land Board, Vythiri, dated 30.07.2016, the properties were not held by M/s.Poddar Plantation. For the sake of convenience, a copy of the said requisition dated 30.07.2016 is marked as Court Exhibit X1.

7. That apart, the reasons which weighed with the learned Single Judges in Exts.P8 and P9 is also taken stock of by this Court. As found therein, Ext.P5 herein is a general Order, which would not reveal the subjective satisfaction of the District Collector of the fact that the transfer of the particular land would defeat the purpose of the provisions of the K.L.R. Act. The land in question is an exempted land and going by the settled position, there is prohibition in transferring an exempted land, or for that matter, using the exempted land for a different purpose. The legal position that, if conversion of an exempted land is effected, it will be open for the competent authority to re-open the ceiling proceedings and include the exempted land for the purpose of ceiling, is also un-assailed.

8. In the circumstances, this Writ Petition is allowed directing the 4^th respondent/Sub Registrar to register the document pursuant to Ext.P4 agreement for lease, in accordance with law, unmindfull of the prohibitory Order vide Ext.P5. Once the document is registered, necessary revenue certificates in respect of the subject land will also be issued by the concerned among the respondents in accordance with law. Needless to say tha