Ashok Bhushan, Ag.CJ
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the Devaswom Board.
2. This writ appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 21/05/2009 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.C.No.3229 of 2006 by which writ petition filed by the petitioners have been dismissed. Petitioners in the writ petition claimed to belong to a family having Karanma right. The State enacted 'The Kerala Service Inam Lands (Vesting and Enfranchisement) Act, 1981, by which all service inams were abolished and provided for vesting of service inam land in the State of Kerala. Section 3 provides for vesting of the rights of land owners in Government and abolition of services.
3. Section 3 of the Act provides as follows:
“3. Vesting of the rights of landowners in Government and abolition of services.-
Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, or in any contract, or in any judgment, decree or order of any Court, with effect on and from the appointed day,-
(1) all right, title and interest of the land owners in Service Inam lands held by land holders shall vest in the Government free from all encumbrances;
(2) any service or obligation attached to Service Inam Lands shall stand abolished and the land-holders shall have no liability or obligation to render any service attached to such lands.”
4. The Government also, by Section 4(1) provided for payment of certain amount to the land owner. Section 4(1) reads as follows:
4. Amount to be paid by the Government.- (1) In consideration of the vesting in the Government of the right, title and interest of any landowner in Service Inam lands under Section 3, the Government shall, subject to
the provisions of this Act, pay to such landowner an amount calculated at the rate of one thousand two hundred rupees per acre of such lands.”
5. Petitioners, who were rendering services after 1981 enactment, claims to have continued with their services and had filed the writ petition praying for the following reliefs:
“i) Issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order direction calling for the records leading to Ext.P4 and also the order passed by the 2nd respondent and mentioned in the order in T.D.B.17/00 etc. and quash the same;
ii) declare that the petitioners are entitled to get all benefits that are being given to departmental kazhakam atleast from 6/1981 onwards and sanction and disburse arrear salary and other benefits given to departmental kazhakam from 6/1981 onwards without any further delay;
iii) direct the 2nd respondent to sanction and disburse pension and other benefits due to petitioners 1 and 4 who have already retired from service treating them as departmental kazhakam without any further delay;
iv) declare that petitioners 2 and 3 are entitled to get pension, gratuity and other benefits consequent on their retirement;”
6. Petitioners had attained superannuation even before filing the writ petition and one petitioner during the pendency of the writ petition. The petitioners had claimed that they should be given the same benefits towards salary, pension and other that are drawn by departmental kazhakam who are performing the same duties. The orders passed in Ext.P4 was also challenged by which their claim was rejected by the Devaswom Commissioner.
7. The learned Single Judge elaborately considered all aspects of the matter and held that there was a valid classification even in the departmental kazhakam and that the petitioners are not entitled for claiming the said benefit. The Division Bench judgment relied upon by petitioners reported in Travancore Devaswom Board v. Chellappan Pillai [1988 (1) KLT 16] was also adverted to in the judgment. We have perused the judgment of the learned Single Judge which elaborately considered the issues raised in the writ petition and held that there is valid classification between the departmental kazhakam and persons like petitioners. We do not find any error in the judgment which may warrant interference by this Court in exercise of appellate jurisdiction.
The writ appeal is dismissed.
(sd/-) (ASHOK BHUSHAN, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) (sd/-) (A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE) jsr