GOPINATHAN PILLAI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are the President and Secretary of the Chavara unit of the All Kerala Document Writers and Scribes Association, which is a registered Association having registration No.96/77. Prior to the re-organisation of States, in July, 1955, His Highness Maharaja of Travancore-Cochin granted 2.22 Ares of land in Re.Sy.No.247/1 of Chavara Village near the Sub Registrar's Office, Chavara, for the purpose of construction of a building for housing the Document Writers and Scribes. Under the aegis of late Kumbalathu Sanku Pillai, a veteran socio political leader, a building was constructed and it is being occupied by the members of the Association and also utilised by people who are visiting the Document Writers and Scribes for the purpose of registration of documents.

(2.) During 2005, on directions issued by the Government, steps were initiated to recover a huge amount as arrears of rent for the land. The petitioners approached this Court by filing W.P(C).No.19537/2005. A counter affidavit was filed (Ext.P2) in the said writ petition by the respondents, wherein it is stated that 2.22 Ares of land was leased out to the petitioners on 8/10/2002 by proceedings No.L6-18747/02 of the District Collector, Kollam, fixing a lease rent of Rs.20,328.00 per annum for a period of three years from 2001-02. It is stated that the petitioners did not turn up to remit the lease rent even after the receipt of the notice. The counter affidavit refers to a request from the Association to reduce the lease rent. It is also stated that the Government had on 16/3/2004 stayed the enhancement of the rate of lease rent in the case of the petitioners till the issue of rationalisation of lease rent is decided or two months, whichever is earlier. Thereafter, the Government on 27/12/2004, informed the petitioners that G.O.(P). No.126/2004 is applicable only to land leased in Municipal and Corporation areas and is not applicable to cases of lease in Panchayat areas. The writ petition was dismissed by judgment (Ext.P1) dtd. 18/1/2012 with an observation that it is for the petitioner to agitate before the Government for appropriate reliefs regarding the issuance of a Government Order for governing lease of land in Panchayat areas, like the one issued for areas coming under Corporation and Municipalities. After Ext.P1 judgment, the petitioners received a notice dtd. 28/11/2015 from the Tahsildar, Karunagappally, which has been produced as Ext.P3. Ext.P3 directs the petitioner to remit the arrears of rent of Rs.50,984.00 after deducting the 25% which has been remitted. Ext.P3 also states that extension of the lease can be considered only after the payment of arrears of lease rent. The petitioners preferred Ext.P4 reply to Ext.P3 wherein it is contended that the Government is bound to refix rents which are payable in Panchayat areas based on the judgment Ext.P1. There is also a request for the assignment of land to the petitioners' association in view of their continuous possession for more than 65 years.

(3.) While so, the land was proposed to be acquired for the widening of NH 47. The petitioners submitted Ext.P5 representation before the Special Deputy Collector (LA), Kollam, claiming that they are in occupation of the land and the building situated therein and that O.S.No.302/2016 is pending before the Munsiff Court, Karunagapally, against the steps initiated under the Revenue Recovery Act, for recovery of arrears of rent. It is also stated in Ext.P5 that a sum of at least Rs.1,00,00,000.00would be required for the rehabilitation of the members of the petitioners' association if the building is acquired. The Special Tahsildar (LA), vide proceedings dtd. 12/7/2018, stated that compensation will be paid for the acquisition of the building and the land and the improvements and that the question relating to rehabilitation has to be decided by the Government. Ext.P9 produced along with the writ petition is the certificate issued by the Chavara Grama Panchayat stating that the petitioners are the owners of the building bearing No.2 in Ward No.3 as per the Assessment Register maintained by the Chavara Grama Panchayat. The petitioners were issued with another notice on 7/8/2020 stating that they can avail of the benefit of the scheme for One Time Settlement of the rent arrears, which has been announced by the Hon'ble Minister of Finance for the year 2019-2020. It is stated that a sum of Rs.4,54,817.00 is due from the petitioners as per the scheme. On receipt of the notice, the petitioners submitted a representation on 9/10/2020 before the District Collector, which has been produced as Ext.P13. The petitioners are thereafter issued with a notice dtd. 6/11/2020 under Sec. 12 of the Kerala Land Conservancy Act VIII of 1958, a copy of which has been produced as Ext.P14. It is stated in Ext.P14 that the poramboke land described in the notice is under the unauthorised occupation of the petitioners, and the petitioners have been directed to show cause why action should not be initiated. The petitioners submitted Ext.P15 reply dtd. 17/11/2020. Ext.P16 dtd. 15/11/1971, is the communication received by the petitioners rejecting an earlier request for assignment. The writ petition has been filed contending that no action for recovery of amounts can be initiated against the petitioners unless and until the Government fixes the rent that is payable in Panchayat areas by the issuance of necessary Government Orders. The petitioners seek to quash Exts.P11 and P14 and pray for a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P13 representation. The fixation of the enhanced rent was challenged by the petitioners before this Court, and this Court was not inclined to allow the claim put forward by the petitioners. This Court also found that the petitioners had not chosen to challenge the Government Orders dtd. 4/5/1994 and 19/12/1985, which, according to the respondents, were the basis for the fixation of lease rent. The Court had only observed that it is for the petitioners to pursue the matter regarding the fixation of lease rent in the Panchayat area before the Government. However, the subsequent letters sent by the petitioners are on the premise that this Court had directed the issuance of Government Orders fixing lease rent in Panchayat areas. A reading of the Ext.P1 judgment would show that there has been no such direction issued by this Court. Since the petitioners had already approached this Court with regard to the rent payable and this Court has dismissed the writ petition, the prayers relating to fixation of lease rent cannot be entertained in this writ petition. The petitioners submitted that they had approached the civil court for relief regarding the demands made under the Revenue Recovery Act. That aspect also need not be gone into in this writ petition. The only other prayer is for consideration of Ext.P13 representation by the District Collector. The properties are already identified for acquisition. As such, the only issue is regarding the compensation payable to the petitioners and adjustment, if any, towards the lease rent payable to the Government.