These are the writ petitions filed by the persons who are in occupation of river poramboke area. The petitioners have approached the authorities for obtaining patta under the Land Assignment Act. They submit that they are eligible for assignment of said land. However, the applications have not been considered for the reason that this Court in the judgment in OP.No.17233 of 1996 and in OP.No.17128/1997 have interdicted the authorities from issuing fresh patta in relation to river poramboke. It seems that some of the petitioners have constructed residential buildings and awaiting issuance of patta.
2. A counter-affidavit has been filed before this Court which shows that it is on account of the direction passed by this Court in the aforesaid judgments, the authorities could not process application for issuance of WP(C).Nos.23709 & 27630/2014.
2 patta. However, it is submitted that some of the petitioners have occupied the land and constructed the building in the land 40 years back. Therefore, the question is whether this Court has passed any order interdicting or prohibiting the authorities from issuing patta. The judgment in OP.No.17233 of 1996 is produced as Ext.P5 in WP(C). No.23709 of 2014, which reads as follows:
“The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction restraining filling of 'puzha puramboke' in Sy.No.985 of Cheranellore Village.
2. It is stated in the Counter affidavit of the 3rd respondent that filling in question had been stayed and the entire areas under encroachment has been taken into custody on 11.11.1996 and that now the total area is under the custody of Government and free from unauthorised encroachment. The Government or the Revenue officials shall not assign the land on the side of the river, or water courses including the land in question to anybody.”
3. In OP.No.17128 of 1997 this Court also held that, it is the duty of the State and its Officers to ensure that the river purambokes are protected from encroachment and are WP(C).Nos.23709 & 27630/2014.
3 retained by the State in the interests of the State. Neverthless those are the directions issued by this Court taking into account public interest in relation to the above land involved; the power vested to the statutory authority in terms of Land Assignment Rules has not been taken away by those directions. The only direction that can be read to the above judgments is to ensure protection of environment. These persons are admittedly in occupation of the above land for a long period. To uphold the public interest and also to protect the environment, necessarily the authority can refuse the issuance of patta to an applicant. However the statutory authority has to exercise the power in genuine cases where patta need to be issued to the persons who are in occupation and whose occupation does not pose any threat to environment. These are all matters fall within the domain of power of statutory authority while exercising discretion in accordance with law. Therefore, notwithstanding the directions of this Court, which according to me, has no bearing in this matter, the application has to be considered WP(C).Nos.23709 & 27630/2014.
4 by the authorities and to process the same in accordance with law as that would apply for assignment river poramboke. Needful shall be done by the competent authority for issuance of patta within a period of two months.
4. In view of the above Ext.P10 in WP(C).
No.27630/2014 is set aside. The second respondent in WP (C).No.27630/2014 and the third respondent in WP(C). No.23709/2014 shall reconsider the matter in accordance with law.
Writ petitions are disposed of as above.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, (JUDGE) Kvs/-
// true copy //