K.A. AUGUSTINE Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Revision is directed against the Order dated. 18.7.2008 by the Taluk Land Board, Thodupuzha in a ceiling proceeding under section 85(9) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'. Ceiling proceedings were closed holding that the declarants, three in number, proceeded jointly, possessed no excess land to surrender. Exemption given to declarants in respect of some Government Poramboke lands over and above granting them exemption to rubber and tea plantations possessed, in fixing the ceiling limit was found to be not correct and proper by the State Land Board, which directed the Taluk Land Board to reopen the case and examine the exemption extended over Government Poramboke land having an extent of 22.88 acres. Though Taluk Land Board reaffirmed its earlier order, the case was again reopened with sanction accorded by the Board, to consider whether exemption provided towards Government Poramboke land was in accordance with law. By that time the declarants who possessed total extent of 141.12.252 acres of land, and involved in the ceiling proceedings, which was closed under Orders passed by the Taluk Land Board, had disposed of portions of those properties including the Government Poramboke land of 22.88 acres. Petitioners and 2nd respondent are some among the transferees, who have purchased 20.100 acres of land from one among the declarants in the proceedings. The aforesaid transferees filed objections raising various grounds in reopening the case, and resumption of lands already exempted. Repelling their objections Taluk Land Board has passed the impugned order directing the transferees to surrender the Government Poramboke land, failing which for their dispossession and resumption of that land. That order is challenged in the revision under Section 103 of the Act. I heard learned senior learned counsel who appeared for revision petitioners, and also learned Special Government pleader for the State.

(2.) Learned senior counsel for petitioners assailed the order of the Taluk Land Board as unsustainable contending that exemption had been granted to the declarants over Government Poramboke land not in isolation but with exemptions granted to plantations, to which exemption from the provisions for fixing ceiling limit is indisputably applicable. Declarants held Poramboke lands with plantations. Previous proceedings before the Forest Tribunal between the Government and declarants in respect of lands covered by the ceiling proceedings ended in favour of the declarants and challenges against the orders of that Tribunal have been turned down by this court and also Apex Court are also canvassed by the counsel to contend that reopening of the ceiling proceedings and orders passed for resuming the Government Poramboke lands which were exempted with the plantations is patently unsustainable. Inviting attention to Section 83 of the Act it is urged by the counsel that the word 'hold' under that section takes within its ambit holding of Government Poramboke land as well, and that being so exemption granted earlier by the Taluk Land Board in respect of the Government Poramboke land with plantations to the declarants was proper and correct. If at all the Government seek recovery of possession of the Government Poramboke land notwithstanding the orders passed by the Taluk Land Board it can have recourse to the provisions of the Land Conservancy Act or such other laws applicable, is the submission of the counsel. Where exemption to the Government Poramboke land with plantation has been given to the declarants, and in view of the previous orders passed by the Forest Tribunal also, learned counsel contended the impugned orders passed by the Taluk Land Board for dispossessing petitioners/claimants for the sole reason the land on transfer obtained by them from the declarants is a Government Poramboke land is unsustainable and it is liable to be set aside. Learned Special Government pleader on the other hand contended that no exemption could have been granted to the Government Poramboke land by the Board. Order passed by the Board directing the petitioners and 2nd respondent, who are assignees of the declarants, to surrender the Poramboke lands which was wrongly exempted in its earlier order does not suffer from any infirmity, is the submission of the learned Special Government Pleader.

(3.) I have perused the records called for from the Taluk Land Board. Previous order passed by the Taluk Land Board exempting Government Poramboke lands with plantations in the ceiling proceedings of the declarants clearly show that it was lying distinct and different from the plantations. Total extent of land held by the three declarants was 141.12.252 acres, of which 86.06 acres was a Tea plantation and 15.67 acres rubber plantations. With such plantations exemption was granted over Government Poramboke lands having an extent of 22.88 acres in the ceiling proceedings by the Board. Whether the exemption granted is legal and permissible, and if not whether land covered by such exemption could be resumed is the question involved.