Land acquired for public purpose cannot be reconveyed once utilized, even if the school became defunct.

JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P7 and for a consequential direction to the 1^st respondent to consider and pass orders on the request of the petitioner for re-transfer of the land acquired from the predecessor for the purpose of establishing Byrayikulam Lower Primary School, Kozhikode.

2. The petitioner contends that an extent of land, measuring 88 Cents in TMS 277/1 of Ward No.17, Block No.10 of Kozhikode Corporation originally belonging to the maternal grandfather of the petitioner, was acquired for accommodating Byrayikulam Lower Primary School. The School, which commenced functioning after the acquisition of the properties, gradually become defunct owing to substantial decline in the number of students in the said School and ultimately the School itself was closed down. In the said circumstances, the petitioner’s mother made a representation to the Government to reconvey the said property, which was declined by the authorities. Challenging the order of the Government, the petitioner’s mother filed WP(C) No.21381 of 2005, which was disposed of by Ext.P2 judgment dated 20.07.2005 directing the Government to reconsider the request made by the petitioner therein. Pursuant to the same, the Government reconsidered the matter and again declined the request of the petitioner’s mother as per order dated 16.05.2008, which was also challenged by her in WP(C) No.13264 of 2012 and this Court, as per Ext.P3 judgment dated 08.06.2012, dismissed the claim of the petitioner’s mother. Challenging the said judgment, an appeal was preferred, which was also dismissed by this Court vide judgment dated 11.01.2013. Though the same was challenged before the Apex Court, it also ended up in dismissal.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the stand taken by the Government before the Apex Court as well as before this Court was that the acquired land was occupied by the school building and that the school was still functioning. However, the functioning of the school was subsequently stopped, and thereafter another representation was filed by the petitioner's mother, which was rejected as per Ext.P4. Subsequently, the representation filed by the petitioner was also dismissed as per Ext.P5. Challenging the said proceedings, the petitioner filed WP(C) No. 28283 of 2018, which was disposed of by Ext.P6 judgment dated 21.08.2018, directing reconsideration of the petitioner’s request for reconveyance of the land. Thereafter, the Government reconsidered the request and rejected the same as per Ext.P7. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner submitted Ext.P8 representation before the Chief Minister of Kerala and also instituted O.S. No.63 of 2020 before the Munsiff’s Court, which is pending consideration. It is in these circumstances that the petitioner has approached this Court. The prayer of the petitioner is that the school constructed on the acquired property has become defunct and, therefore, the acquired land is lying idle and hence, the same is liable to be reconveyed to the petitioner.

4. A detailed counter affidavit has been filed by the Government and based on the same it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that even though the School falls under the category of uneconomic School, it is still functioning. The other offices functioning in the School compound are Government or semi-Government agencies related to Education Department and the closure of the School by General Education Department, as argued by the petitioner, does not give him any right to reconvey the land as the decision on the Government land has to be taken by the Revenue Department.

5. I have heard the rival contentions on both sides.

6. Admittedly, the land was acquired for construction of a Schoo