STATE OF KERALA Vs. NARAYANAN NAMBOODIRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this Civil Revision Petition, the State has challenged the order of the Taluk Land Board, Alathur. The Taluk Land Board directed the declarant to surrender an extent of 80.48 acres. According to the revision petitioner, the declarant is liable to surrender more than 80.48 acres.

(2.) The learned Government Pleader advanced four points for my consideration. He submitted that the finding of the Taluk Land Board is that an extent of 3.29 acres in Sy. No. 153/32 and an extent of 0.84 acres are held by lessees. The Taluk Land Board has held so relying on the report of the authorised officer. The learned Government Pleader was not able to attack the report of the authorised officer on any valid ground. The scheme of the Kerala Land Reforms Act gives great evidentiary value to the report of the authorised officer in ascertaining the true facts necessary for the determination and decision by the Taluk Land Boards. Anyhow, this is a question of fact and I do not think that I can interfere with the finding since my power under S.103 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act is only to examine whether the authorities have failed to decide a question of law or decided a question of law wrongly.

(3.) The declarant contended that an extent of 11.81 acres in Sy. No.1/7A of Thenur amsom and another 16.39 acres in Sy. No. 83/2 are private forests and so those items have to be excluded. This aspect of the matter was considered by the Taluk Land Board and the Taluk Land Board found that these two items have to be deleted. Further, the Taluk Land Board observed that the matter has to be referred to the Divisional Forest Officer, Palghat for action. On this aspect also, the Taluk Land Board has relied on the report of the authorised officer. I think what the Taluk Land Board did is correct and requires no interference in this civil revision petition.