LALJI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners state that they are the owners in title and possession of property having an extent of 1 Hectare 84.21 ares comprised in Survey No.1833/1 of Sholayur Village. The aforesaid property was acquired by the petitioners on the strength of various deeds. They state that they have effected mutation in their favour and they have been remitting tax as is evident from Exhibit P5 receipt. The revenue authorities have also issued possession certificate and this aspect is borne out from Exhibit P6. The petitioners contend that the party respondents claiming that the petitioners have violated the provisions of the Kerala Scheduled Tribes (Restriction on Transfer of Lands and Restoration of Alienated Lands) Act, 1975, have staked a claim over the property. According to the petitioners, the extent of the property acquired by the petitioners is less than 2 hectares and as provided under Sub-Section (5) of Act 12 of 1999, the provisions of the Act will not be attracted. They plan to assign the property to strangers, for which they approached the Revenue Authorities to measure out the property. However, when the revenue authorities attempted to measure out the properties, obstructions were caused. It is in the afore circumstances, that they have approached this Court seeking a direction to the

(2.) nd respondent to provide adequate and effective police protection to the life of the petitioners and for their properties and also for measuring out their properties comprised in Survey No.1833/1 without any obstruction from respondent Nos.5 to 7. 2. The learned Government Pleader on instructions submitted that the Sub Collector, Ottappalam has called for a report from the Tahsildar concerned to ascertain as to whether there is any violation of the provisions of the Act 12 of 1999. According to the learned Government Pleader, the said proceedings are pending. However, it is submitted that insofar as the survey of the land by the revenue authorities are concerned, there cannot be any obstruction as no rights are affected.

(3.) Though notice was served on respondent Nos. 5 to 7, there is no appearance.