“Not Happy With How Munnar, Idukki Being Handled”: Kerala High Court Seeks Names For Special Task Force To Tackle Land Encroachments

The Munnar Bench of Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice Basant Balaji orally remarked that there cannot be any more delay in this important issue and the first priority is the constitution of the STF, for which the government has to suggest names of three of its officers.

“All the recommendations made by the various committees and any other further recommendations will have to be considered by the STF… We are incapacitated without the STF now… Next Thursday, we want the names. We are not happy with the way Munnar is being handled now or Idukki is being handled… next Thursday, we will constitute the STF. No further delay,” the Bench orally added.

The development comes in a batch of matters, including a public interest litigation raising the issue of large-scale illegal encroachments and forged pattas in respect to the afore areas. During the course of earlier proceedings, the Court had constituted a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to inspect the veracity of pattas and a Digital Survey Team to conduct digital survey of the areas.

During the last hearing, the Court had proposed the constitution of a Special Task Force to replace the Monitoring Committee that was entrusted with the task of the monitoring the SIT and the Digital Survey Team. The STF is also to implement the recommendations of various government committees/officers on the issue of illegal encroachments. The Court had asked the State to suggest the names of three officials, who can be exclusively engaged in the task for the next 6 months. It had also stated that the amicus curiae and one or two lawyers can also be made part of the STF.

When the matter came up today, the Court granted one more weeks' time to suggest the names. It, however, added:

“we will record that we are not happy with any delay because it is only after the Special Task Force is constituted and they embark upon the task that we propose to put them on, can the investigation by the Special Investigation Team and even the Digital Survey be effectively modulated, controlled and completed… when it comes to the lands in Idukki, we cannot allow even a whispering amount of delay.”

The amicus curiae Harish Vasudevan submitted that the team of Digital Survey team merely goes to a site and marks the boundaries using satellite latitudes and longitudes at the suggestion of the person claiming to be in possession. He suggested that every Village Officer be directed to be part of the Digital Survey for the respective Village so that the documents can also be properly assessed.

Advocate Daisy A. Philipose, who is appearing for some of the petitioners, added that merely because the Digital Survey Team marks boundaries or extents, the person in possession cannot be allowed to claim right. She insisted that the SIT may be directed to look into all such aspects before any final decision is taken by the State and that no new pattas or title documents be allowed to be created.

It was also submitted that unless the STF comes in, the protocols to be followed for the purpose identification of the property, verification of title documents and other interests cannot be properly evaluated since the documents and books are not being maintained in the various offices as per law.

Considering the submissions, the Court directed that the respective Village Officers can also be added to the Digital Survey Teams. It observed:

“As far as the Special Investigation Team and the Digital Survey Teams are concerned, they will certainly continue with the task entrusted to them but eventually, they will be obligated to follow the protocols that are to be suggested and created by the Special Task Force. In other words, merely because we are in the process of creating a Special Task Force, neither the Special Investigation Team or the Digital survey team will stop their work. They will continue with full vigour except that the latter team will also have the Village Officer or a person authorized by such officer as part of their team in future activities.”

The Court has also directed the State to submit a short report on the present activities of the SIT and the Digital Survey Team by the next posting date. The case stands posted to November 5 (Thursday).

Counsel for the petitioners: P.V. Dinesh (Sr.), Praveen S., Daisy A. Philipose

Counsel for the respondents: K.C. Vincent – Additional Advocate General, Raphael Thekkan – Government Pleader

Amicus Curiae: Harish Vasudevan