Petitioners have approached this Court seeking the following reliefs: “i. To issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, calling for the records leading to Ext. P11 and to quash the same;
ii. to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, direction, directing the respondents 3 and 4 to assume possession of the property as indicated in Ext. P4 plan as identified by the Village Officer, Polpully, pursuant to Ext. P3 order.”
2. Ext. P11 is a notice issued by the Village Officer, 4th respondent herein, calling upon the petitioners to remove a pipeline going across his property which is directed to be surrendered by the Taluk Land Board.
3. The facts involved in the case would disclose that the petitioners were called upon to surrender certain item of land as excess land in a ceiling proceedings which had become final before the Taluk Land Board. The petitioners exercised option to surrender certain item of land which was accepted by the Taluk Land Board and the property was demarcated by the Village Officer in terms of Ext. P4 plan. In Ext. P4 plan, it is indicated with reference to one item of property that a pipeline passes across the said property. Subsequently, another plan was prepared by the Additional Tahsildar, wherein a suggestion was made that the petitioners should remove the pipeline from the property to be surrendered. That apart, in regard to another item of property having an extent of 2.45½ acres, which was also demarcated as per Ext. P4 plan, certain changes in the alignment had been made in Ext. P6 plan by which the petitioners had to surrender most of the portion of land in their possession on the southern side.
4. Petitioners have two complaints. One is regarding the pipeline which, according to them, has been put up in 1960 and there is no necessity to remove the same, as the pipeline is required for the beneficial enjoyment of other properties belonging to the petitioners. The second is with reference to Ext. P6 plan by which demarcation of property, which he has not offered to surrender, has been made in respect of 2.45½ acres.
5. Counter affidavit is filed by the 3rd respondent inter alia stating that as far as the pipeline is concerned, the respondent authority have no intention to call upon the petitioners to remove the same. Paragraph 4 is relevant which reads as under:
“4. As per the order of the District Collector in Ext. R3(a), the land in Re.Survey No. 18/1 and 19/2 were surveyed and demarcated for 84 plots and buried survey marks at the boundaries leaving the area under which the main pipeline is passing through as shown by the petitioners untouched and not taken over as excess land. A true copy of the survey sketch is produced herewith and may be marked as Ext. R3(a). The intention of doing so is that the cultivation in the remaining landed properties owned by the petitioners situated adjacent to the lands (eastern and southern sides) taken over should not be disturbed. This can be easily understood from the Survey sketch prepared for the same (Ext. R3(c).”
6. As far as the option exercised by the petitioners to surrender 2.45½ acres as provided in Ext. P4 plan is concerned, no specific mention is made in the counter affidavit . The learned Government Pleader would however submit that the excess land which is to be surrendered by the petitioners are to be provided to landless people and therefore in order to demarcate separate plots, some modification had been made to enable the revenue authorities to allot the said land to landless people with sufficient road frontage and other conveniences.
7. As far as the first issue is concerned, the respondent authority have agreed to the request of the petitioner. But, it is made clear that while assigning the land, the respondent authority should make it clear to the assignees that the pipeline should not be destroyed in any manner.
8. As far as the 2nd issue is concerned, when the petitioners have exercised their option to surrender certain item of land, which is permitted by the Taluk Land Board, the petitioners' option has to be agreed upon and once the Village Officer had already prepared a plan at Ext. P4, which is agreed by the petitioners, there is no necessity to call upon the petitioners to re-align the said area to be surrendered.
9. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the entire land is paddy land and it has no road access and as such and the petitioners intention was only to retain the land on the southern side as there are coconut trees standing by the side of it. When an option is already exercised by the petitioners and the property has been demarcated by the Village Officer in terms of Ext. P4 plan, there was no necessity to deviate from the same. In the said circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of as under:
(i) Ext. P11 is set aside on the basis of the counter affidavit filed by the respondent authority.
(ii) There will be a direction to respondents 3 and 4 to take possession of the petitioners' property as indicated in Ext. P4 plan. It is needless to say, when the land is taken possession, the respondent authority is entitled to disburse the land to the prospective assignees.
Sd/- A.M. Shaffique, Judge.
Tds/