W.P.(C)No.24091 of 2016 1 2025:KER:11073 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANIL K. NARENDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALEE KRISHNA S. MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 21ST MAGHA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 24091 OF 2016 PETITIONER: T.C. ELIYAS, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O. CHERIAN, THURUVAKKAL HOUSE, MACHIPLAVU, ADIMALY P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV K. PRAVEEN KUMAR RESPONDENTS: 1 THE STATE OF KERALA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2 TAHSILDAR DEVICULAM TALUK, DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 613. 3 THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER DEVIKULAM, PIN-685 613. OTHER PRESENT: SRI. HANIL KUMAR, SPL. GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10.02.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C)No.24091 of 2016 2 2025:KER:11073 JUDGMENT Anil K. Narendran, J. The petitioner, who claims absolute possession and enjoyment of land having an extent of 6.51 Acres in Sy.No.189/1 of Mannamkandam Village, Devikulam Taluk, Idukki District, on the strength of Ext.P1 sale agreement dated 29.03.2010 entered into with one Babu P. Kuriakose, on a stamp paper worth Rs.100/-, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P9 Government order dated 02.04.2016, whereby the request made by the petitioner for assignment of the said land under the provisions of the Kerala Land Assignment (Regularisation of Occupations of Forest Lands prior to 01.01.1977) Special Rules, 1993, stands rejected, for the reason stated therein. 2. Going by the averments in the writ petition, Babu P. Kuriakose obtained the aforesaid land vide a sale agreement dated 25.03.1998 executed with Narayanan Kesavan and Chandy Baby, who were in possession of that land from 1973 onwards. They sold their possessory rights to Babu P. Kuriakose. After the execution of Ext.P1 sale agreement, the petitioner submitted W.P.(C)No.24091 of 2016 3 2025:KER:11073 Ext.P2 application dated 17.10.2011 before the 2nd respondent Tahsildar, Devikulam, for the assignment of that land. The petitioner had approached this Court by filing W.P.(C)No.2605 of 2014 for an early disposal of Ext.P2 application for assignment of land. A learned Single Judge of this Court, by Ext.P6 judgment dated 30.01.2014 disposed of that writ petition, directing the 1st respondent State to cause the joint inspection contemplated in Ext.P5 order dated 25.06.2013 of the 2nd respondent Tahsildar, Devikulam, which is one issued pursuant to the directions contained in Ext.P4 judgment of this Court dated 15.11.2012 in W.P.(C)No.24740 of 2012, and take a decision on the application for assignment of land, expeditiously, within the time limit prescribed in that judgment. Pursuant to the direction contained in the aforesaid judgment, a joint inspection was conducted. The Tahsildar, Devikulam submitted Ext.P7 report dated 24.09.2014 to the Divisional Forest Officer, Munnar Division and Ext.P8 report dated 10.10.2014 to the Land Revenue Commissioner. Thereafter, the 1st respondent State vide Ext.P9 order dated 02.04.2016 rejected the request made by the petitioner for assignment of 6.51 Acres of land in Survey No.189/1 (Resurvey W.P.(C)No.24091 of 2016 4 2025:KER:11073 No.50, Block No.4) of Mannamkandam Village, Idukki District. The said order is under challenge in this writ petition. 3. On 20.07.2016, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned State Attorney entered appearance for the respondents. 4. The 3rd respondent Divisional Forest Officer, Munnar has filed a counter affidavit dated 17.10.2024, opposing the reliefs sought for in this petition, producing therewith Exts.R3(a) and R3(b) documents. Paragraphs 16 to 22 of that counter affidavit read thus; “16. The petitioner approached this Honourable Court by filing WP(C)No.2605 of 2014, seeking to expedite joint verification. The Honourable High Court, as per Exhibit P6 judgment dated 30.04.2014, had ordered to conduct joint verification of the land within a period of 3 months. Subsequently, as directed by the Honourable High Court, and after conducting joint verification, Government rejected the petitioner's prayer for assignment of the land as per the Ext.P9 Government Order. Now the petitioner has challenged the Ext.P9 GO in this W.P.(C). 17. It may be true that the property has been recorded as 'Government Puramboke under Malayattur Reserve' in records kept in certain revenue department offices. But the mere fact that there is such a recording does not make the W.P.(C)No.24091 of 2016 5 2025:KER:11073 land liable to be assigned. As stated above, the "Malayattur Reserve" had been constituted under the Travancore Forest Act, 1893 [Regulation ll of 1068]. For a reserved forest to lose its status as such, it should be dis- reserved as envisaged under section 26 of the Kerala Forest Act, 1961. In the case of the land claimed by the petitioner, no such notification has been issued by the Government dis-reserving the same. Hence, any recording in any records of any other department of the Government, contrary to the notification issued under the Travancore Forest Act, is not legally valid. Therefore, the petitioner cannot derive any benefit from the Exts.P7 and P8 documents. 18. Further, as per Ext.P7, it is clearly stated that the disputed land has been recorded as reserved forest in the revenue records. In Ext.P8 also it is stated that as per BTR, [re] survey No. 50 of block No.4 has been recorded as reserved forest. The land the petitioner claims is part of the ''Malayattur Reserve". As per the Vana Samrakshan Evam Samvardhan Abhiyan, 1980, assigning land for agricultural purposes is a non-forestry activity. As per section 2(ii) of the Act, prior sanction of the Government of India is required for diverting forest land for non- forestry purposes. Section 2 is reproduced below. Restriction on the dereservation of forests or use of forest land for non-forest purpose.- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force in a State, no State Government or other authority shall make, except W.P.(C)No.24091 of 2016 6 2025:KER:11073 with the prior approval of the Central Government, any order directing- (i) that any reserved forest (within the meaning of the expression "reserved forest' in any law for the time being in force in that State) or any portion thereof, shall cease to be reserved; (ii) that any forest land or any portion thereof may be used for any non-forest purpose. (iii) that any forest land or any portion thereof may be assigned by way of lease or otherwise to any private person or to any authority, corporation, agency or any other organization 3 [subject to such terms and conditions, as the Central Government may, by order, specify]; (iv) that any forest land or any portion thereof may be cleared of trees which have grown naturally in that land or portion, for the purpose of using it for reafforestation. Explanation. -For the purposes of this section "non-forest purpose" means the breaking up or clearing of any forest land or portion thereof for- (a) the cultivation of tea, coffee, spices, rubber, palms, oil-bearing plants, horticultural crops or medicinal plants (b) any purpose other than reafforestation, [but does not include any work relating to or ancillary to conservation, development and management of forests and wildlife, such as- (i) silvicultural operations including regeneration operations; W.P.(C)No.24091 of 2016 7 2025:KER:11073 (ii) establishment of check-posts and infrastructure for the front line forest staff; (iii) establishment and maintenance of fire lines; (iv) wireless communications; (v) construction of fencing, boundary marks or pillars,, bridges and culverts, check dams, waterholes, trenches and pipelines; (vi) establishment of zoo and safaris referred to in the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 (53 of 1972), owned by the Government or any authority, in forest areas other than protected areas; (vii) eco-tourism facilities included in the Forest Working Plan or Wildlife Management Plan or Tiger Conservation Plan or Working Scheme of that area; and (viii) any other like purposes, which the Central Government may, by order, specify. The Central Government may, by order, specify the terms and conditions subject to which any survey, such as, reconnaissance, prospecting, investigation or exploration including seismic survey, shall not be treated as non- forest purpose. 19. During the 1980s, the Government of Kerala took a decision to regularize all the encroachments into forest land prior to 01.01.1977. Joint verification of forest land encroached prior to 01.01.1977, was conducted by the Revenue and Forest departments and lists thereof have been prepared, before 1985. As per No. 8-118/86 FC dtd. 31.01.1995, sanction had been accorded by the Government of India under the Forest [Conservation] Act, W.P.(C)No.24091 of 2016 8 2025:KER:11073 1980, for diversion of 28588.159 ha of forest land for assignment to the encroachers, and assignment has been made under the Kerala Land Assignment [Regularization of Occupation of Forest Lands Prior to 01.01.1977 Special Rules, 1993. Sri. Eliyas T.C., the petitioner, or Sri. Babu P Kuriakose, his predecessor-in-interest, or Sri. Kesavan, S/o. Narayanan, Chathaplackal house, Perisakkallu, or Sri. Baby, S/o. Chandy, Koorppillil house, Mannamkandam are not included in the Joint Verification List of Neraiamangalam Range. Therefore, for assigning land to the petitioner, prior sanction of the Government of India under the Vana Samrakshan Evam Samvardhan Abhiyan, 1980, is required. There is a well established procedure under the relevant rules for obtaining prior sanction of the Government of India, like submitting application online, remittance of Net Present Value of the land, raising compensatory afforestation etc. All the above-mentioned procedure will have to be complied for assignment of the disputed land. 20. The case of the petitioner is clear. He has no forest land in his possession in Neriarrangalam Range. Attempts made by his predecessor-in-interest to encroach on forest land have already been thwarted by the forest department. His predecessor had been evicted from the land encroached upon in 2011. His intention in filing the WP[C] is to secure a judgment in his favour and then to encroach upon forest land. He is not legally eligible for assignment of the land. The land claimed by the petitioner is a W.P.(C)No.24091 of 2016 9 2025:KER:11073 Compensatory Afforestation plantation raised by the Government in 2020. 21. The petitioner and his predecessor had filed various cases before the Honourable High Court and Honourable Munsiff Court. But no case had been ordered in their favour so as to enable him to have assignment of the land. The case is already decided. Hence the WP[C] is barred by res judicata. It is understood that Sri. C T Eliyas, the petitioner herein, is benami of Sri. Babu P Kuriakose. He is engaged in a proxy war with the Government. 22. Sri. Babu P Kuriakose, predecessor-in-interest to the petitioner, had commenced a legal show down with the forest department about quarter of a century ago. After pursuing for more than a decade, he has retreated behind the curtain and delegated the, petitioner in the present W.P.(C) pursue the legal battle. But, both of 'them do not have any sort of legal right over the reserved forest claimed by them.'' 5. The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit dated 23.11.2024, producing therewith Ext.P12 certificate dated 22.09.1999 issued by the Secretary of Adimali Grama Panchayat, wherein, it is certified that the ownership of the buildings referred to therein stands changed in the name of Babu, S/o Kuriakose. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents. W.P.(C)No.24091 of 2016 10 2025:KER:11073 7. The issue that requires consideration in this writ petition is as to whether any interference is warranted on Ext.P9 order dated 02.04.2016. 8. The specific stand taken in the counter affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent Divisional Forest Officer, Munnar is that the land claimed to be transferred as per the Exts.P1 and P2 documents is part of 'Malayattur Reserve', which is a notified reserved forest. The same had been notified as reserved forest by the erstwhile Government of Travancore, as per notification published in the Travancore Government Gazette dated 9th July, 1895. As per section 22 of the Kerala Forest Act, 1961, no right shall be acquired by anyone over reserved forest except under a grant or contract in writing made on behalf of the Government. Moreover, the sale consideration in Ext.P1 agreement is Rs.2,50,000/- and the said agreement is made on a stamp paper worth Rs.100/-. Similarly, the sale consideration in Ext.P2 agreement is Rs.2,25,000/- and the said agreement is made on a stamp paper worth Rs.50/-. The aforesaid documents were not registered under the provisions of Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908. If, as claimed by the petitioner, his predecessors-in- W.P.(C)No.24091 of 2016 11 2025:KER:11073 interest had been in possession of the land from 1973, it would have been subjected to joint verification and their name should have been included in the joint verification list of Neryamangalam Range, and they would have been granted patta for the land. The case of the petitioner is a post 01.01.1977 encroachment, which cannot be held legal in view of the legal provisions relating to utilisation and protection of forest land, being enforced by the Central and State Governments. Along with the writ petition, the petitioner has not chosen to produce any legally valid documents to prove the claim of occupancy prior to 01.01.1977. 9. As pointed out in the counter affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent Divisional Forest Officer, the claim made by Babu P. Kuriakose, the vendor in Ext.P1 sale agreement, who is the vendee in Ext.P2 sale agreement over 6.51 Acres of land had been rejected by the Government by Ext.R3(a) order. i.e., G.O. (Rt.)No.384/06/F&WLD dated 23.09.2006. The said order was under challenge in W.P.(C)No.3686 of 2007 filed by Babu P. Kuriakose. The said writ petition was disposed of by directing him to submit representation before the Revenue authorities. W.P.(C)No.24091 of 2016 12 2025:KER:11073 That judgment was under challenge in W.A.No.565 of 2009, which was disposed of by allowing Babu P. Kuriakose to file an application before the Revenue authorities. He subsequently filed Contempt Case (Civil)No.985 of 2011 before this Court against the Revenue Secretary, Forest Secretary and the officials of the Forest Department and also the District Collector, Idukki for not granting him assignment of land. That contempt case also ended in dismissal by the order of this Court dated 22.09.2011. 10. As pointed out in the counter affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent Divisional Forest Officer, the claim made by Babu Kuriakose and two others, namely, Kesavan and Baby, for assignment of land in Sy.No.189/1 of Mannamkandam Village, Devikulam Taluk in Idukki District stands rejected by Ext.R3(a) order dated 23.09.2006 of the 1st respondent State. A forest offence has also been registered against those persons as OR No.14 of 2011 on the file of Neriyamangalam Village. In the above circumstances, we find no valid grounds to interfere with Ext.P9 order dated 02.04.2016 of the 1st respondent State, since the petitioner has no legal right to seek assignment of 6.51 Acres of land in Survey No.189/1 (Resurvey W.P.(C)No.24091 of 2016 13 2025:KER:11073 No.50, Block No.4) of Mannamkandam Village in Idukki District. In the result, this writ petition fails and the same is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE Sd/- MURALEE KRISHNA S., JUDGE Dxy W.P.(C)No.24091 of 2016 14 2025:KER:11073 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24091/2016 RESPONDENT EXHIBITS EXHIBIT R3(A) COPY OF G.O (RT) NO. 384/06/ F AND WLD DATED 23.09.2006 EXHIBIT R3(B) COPY OF THE FOREST OFFENCE CHARGE SHEET FORM II EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE NO. E- 1/126/1999 DATED 22.09.1999 ISSUED BY THE ADIMALI GRAMA PANCHYATH PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 15.11.2012 IN WPC NO.24740/2012. EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 25.6.2013. EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 30.1.2014 IN WPC NO.2605/2014. EXHIBIT P7 COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE FIRST GRADE SURVEYOR, DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICE, MUNNAR DIVISION DATED 24.9.2014. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 25.3.1998. EXHIBIT P9 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 2.4.2016 BY 1ST RESPONDENT. W.P.(C)No.24091 of 2016 15 2025:KER:11073 EXHIBIT P10 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY MANNAMKANDAM PANCHAYAT DATED 20.8.1995 TO KESAVAN. EXHIBIT P11 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY MANNAMKANDAM PANCHAYAT DATED 20.8.1995 TO BABY. EXHIBIT P8 COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE TAHSILDAR, DEVIKULAM DATED 10.10.2014. EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 29.3.2010. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE ASSIGNMENT APPLICATION DATED 17.10.2011.