KUNHAHMMED KUTTY Vs. TALUK LAND BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner filed a claim petition under S.85(8) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act in S. R. No. 189/73/KKD pending before the Taluk Land Board, Chavakkad. The said proceedings were initiated against the fourth respondent herein for surrender of excess land. The petitioner claimed right over 8. 54 acres of land comprised in various survey numbers. On an earlier occasion the claim of the petitioner was disallowed and a civil revision petition was filed against that. This Court set aside the order of the Taluk Land Board and directed to consider the claim afresh. By the impugned order the Taluk Land Board held that the revision petitioner is having leasehold right over 8.54 acres of land but in the same order the Taluk Land Board stated that the petitioner was an unmarried person as on 1-1-1970 and be was not entitled to bold more than 6 acres in extent and therefore be is liable to surrender 2.50 acres out of 8. 54. That order is being challenged by the petitioner.

(2.) The learned counsel for the revision petitioner pointed out that in a claim petition filed under S.85(8) of the Act, the Taluk Land Board was not justified in determining the ceiling area of the claimant and the Board should not have directed the petitioner to surrender 2.54 acres. There is some force in that contention.

(3.) If the petitioner herein was having excess land as on 1-1-1970 proceedings should have been initiated under S.85(7) of the K.L.R. Act. Admittedly the revision petitioner bad not filed any statement under S.85(2) or 85(3)(a) of the Act. So the only step taken against the petitioner is under S.85(7) of the Act for which the intimation from the Land Board is necessary. Moreover a draft statement is to be prepared and the petitioner should be given opportunity to file bis objection. Without complying all these formalities, the Taluk Land Board should not have directed the petitioner to surrender 2.54 acres of property. The direction of the Taluk Land Board to surrender 2.54 acres of property is not sustainable and hence the impugned order of the Taluk Land Board is set aside.