MARY BABY Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ext.P12 order passed by the 4threspondent rejecting Ext.P4 application submitted by the petitioner to issue pass to cut, remove and transport teak trees planted by her in her property is under challenge in this writ petition.

(2.) The petitioner is the owner of 0.072 hectares of land comprised in Survey No.1397/146/1 situated in Peechi Village. She obtained the said property by way of assignment under the Kerala Government Land Assignment Act, 1960 (for short 'the Land Assignment Act') as per Ext.P1 patta. According to the petitioner, after she acquired the right over the property as per Ext.P1, she planted around 150 teak trees therein. Since a neighbour has been complaining that the trees are a threat to his house, she decided to cut and remove them, and she submitted Ext.P4 application before the 3rd respondent seeking permission to cut the trees and to issue a pass to transport the same. The 3rdrespondent asked the petitioner to approach the revenue authorities. Accordingly, she submitted Ext.P6 application seeking permission to cut and remove the teak trees before the 4threspondent. The 4th respondent rejected the Ext.P6 application as per the Ext.P12 order, which is impugned in this writ petition.

(3.) I have heard Smt. Sneha Rajiv, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. T.P. Sajan, the learned Special Government Pleader.