TAHSILDAR KANAYANNUR TALUK Vs. LUCY EAPEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondents No. 1 and 2 in O. P. No. 5481 of 1974 -- the Tahsildar, Kanayannur Taluk, Ernakulam and the District Collector, Ernakulam respectively -- are the appellants in this appeal which has been tiled against the judgment of a learned single Judge of this court allowing the said writ petition and quashing the orders Exts. P3 and P5 impugned therein.

(2.) The parties will hereafter be referred with reference to their rank and array in the original petition.

(3.) Proceedings under the Kerala Land Conservancy Act, 1957 (for short the Act) were initiated against the writ petitioner by the 1st respondent in July, 1968 for unauthorised occupation of an extent of 4 cents 946 square links of poramboke land comprised in Survey No. 1803 and 1801/1 of Ernakulam Village. A notice in form 'B' was issued to the writ petitioner and in response thereto the writ petitioner appeared before the Tahasildar and filed a petition stating that her occupation of the said poramboke land was authorised by the Ernakulam Municipality and that she had been paying poramboke occupation fee to the Municipality. It was further submitted by her that the land was lying formerly as a part of a muddy pool and she has reclaimed it since it was essential for the beneficial enjoyment of her adjacent registered holding and that she had already submitted an application before the Collector in Feb., 1963 praying that the land may be assigned to her. On 11-4-1969 the 1st respondent (Tahsildar) passed the order Ext. P3 rejecting the writ petitioner's contentions and holding the petitioner guilty of unauthorised encroachment under S.5 of the Act. The petitioner was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- under S.7 of the Act and prohibitory assessment was levied at 5 times the single rate for the entire period of occupation under S.8 of the Act. It was pointed out in the order that the application for assignment submitted by the petitioner to the Government on 15-2-1963 had been rejected and orders in that regard had been communicated to her as early as on 30-9-1967 pointing out that the land in question being a road poramboke could not be assigned to anybody.