SESHADRANATH SARMA Vs. CHIEF SECRETARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These petitions are by two different persons who have put up buildings in S. No. 843/B of the Kannan Devan Hills Pakuthy. This property was originally enjoyed by the Kannan Devan Hills Produce Company under a long term lease from the Government of Travancore. This survey number along with the adjoining property had been acquired by Government of Travancore in 1941 for the use of P.H.E. Project, Munnar. The petitioners stated that under the impression that this survey No. 843/B was waste land belonging to Government, the P.W.D. at Munnar allowed them to put up buildings for residential purposes. The petitioner in O.P. 15 of 1950 though an Advocate was also a P.W.D. contractor and he wanted a residential quarter in Munnar to carry on his business. The father of the petitioner in O.P. 15 of 1950 was one Narayanaswami who died in Thulam 1125. He was a vakil in Devicolam and it was stated that he wanted to put up building as a residential quarter for carrying on the education of his children. These two persons had however constructed buildings in portions of this survey number. It was stated that when the construction of the buildings was started the Kannan Devan Hills Company intervened claiming the plots as part of their area. The petitioners therefore obtained sanction of the said company in the matter of the occupation and construction. This was in 1933. Subsequently in 1940 the Government of Travancore at the instance of the P.W.D. took action under the Land Acquisition Act for acquiring an area of about 16 acres out of the concessional area granted to the Company. The plots where the two buildings of the petitioners in O.P. 15 and 16 of 1950 had been constructed were also included within the area acquired by Government. In carrying out the acquisition proceedings the buildings of the petitioners were excluded and they were not made parties to the proceedings. No notice of the steps taken by the Government under the Land Acquisition Act was issued to them so that the proceedings terminated as regards the bare plot alone apart from the buildings. The petitioners were therefore under the impression that they could be granted the plots on which their buildings stood. Contrary to their expectations the Government on the advice of the Chief Engineer proposed to take over the entire area even though to their knowledge it involved a going back on their prior commitments so far as the petitioners and the plots in their possession were concerned. Notice was therefore issued by the Tahsildar, Devicolam directing the petitioners to remove themselves and the buildings failing which action was threatened under the Land Conservancy Act.

(2.) It had been stated that the petitioners had unauthorisedly erected the buildings at a time when the site was the property of Government. On the refusal by the petitioners to conform with the Tahsildar's demand the latter started proceedings against the petitioner in O.P. 15 as L.C. 37 of 1122 and against the petitioner's father in O.P. 16 as L.C. 36 of 1122 under the Land Conservancy Act. But before the proceedings terminated in any final order for eviction or otherwise the petitioners applied to the Government and obtained stay of the further trial. Their prayer to give these plots permanently to them or on Kuthakapattom was however later on rejected by the order dated 21.4.1950. The order directed the District Collector, Kottayam to push through the eviction proceedings after giving the petitioners the option to remove the structures within a month. If they failed to do so, the buildings were directed to be dismantled and the materials auctioned by the Government at the petitioner's risk. On further representation to Government to reconsider as the petitioners had not offered the buildings for sale to Government their prayer could not be considered.

(3.) Purporting to execute the orders of Government dated 21.4.1950 and 24.5.1950, the Tahsildar, Devicolam, issued notice on 25.5.50 stating that the buildings not having been dismantled would be sold in public auction on 10.6.1950 and that the petitioners would be evicted from the property. According to the petitioners the orders passed by Government and the notice by the Tahsildar were illegal and passed without jurisdiction and could not be allowed to affect the rights of the petitioner to continue to occupy the plots in question and the buildings thereon. According to them they were entitled to have the plots in question granted in their favour either by way of registry or on Kuthakapattom as the Government was bound by their covenants and acts to ensure to the petitioners the free and unfettered use of their residential quarters. According to them the order for the eviction of the petitioners without finalising the proceedings under the Land Conservancy Act started in 1122 as L.C. Nos. 37 and 36 of 1122 was totally without legal justification. The provisions of the Land Conservancy Act, they further contended, could not themselves apply in as much as (a) the land acquisition proceedings with regard to the plot alone apart from the super-structure could not vest a right in the Government to claim the plots free of their burdens and (b) the land had been occupied and built upon with the sanction of the K.D.H. Produce Company, the original owners long before the plot was sought to be made Government land. In this matter therefore the Government were not entitled to take the law into their own hands and ignore the petitioners' possession of the site at all relevant times and proceed to evict the petitioners and remove the buildings otherwise than in due course of law.