GEORGE PAUL Vs. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is an assignee of land under the Wynad Colonisation Scheme Rules, 1969. These Rules are made under S.3 read with S.7 of the Kerala Government Land Assignment Act, 1960. An area of 1.42 acres was assigned to the petitioner on 16th December 1970 by order of the Administrative Officer in terms of R.7. Pattayam was issued to him on 19th January 1970. The assignment was however cancelled by order of the Administrative Officer dated 29th February 1972 (Ext. P-1). Ext. P-2 is the order of the District Collector rejecting an appeal against Ext. P-1. The petitioner filed a revision before the Board of Revenue against Exts. P-1 and P-2. That was also rejected. These orders were challenged in revision before the Government, but the Government by Ext. P-3 rejected the revision application and confirmed Exts. P-1 and P-2 as well as the order of the Board of Revenue.

(2.) The reason mentioned in Ext. P-1 for cancellation of the assignment is that the petitioner did not disclose that an area of 88 cents forming part of the total area of 1.42 acres was covered by a lease granted by the Government in favour of the petitioner's father and the period of the lease had not run out. This is what the officer says in Ext. P-1:

(3.) The only provision relied upon by the authorities for the cancellation of the assignment is rule (2), which reads: