The Hindu : Front Page : Court seeks records of title deeds

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Wednesday, Aug 22, 2007
ePaper

Front Page

Front Page

Court seeks records of title deeds

Special Correspondent

Expresses displeasure with the affidavit filed by State Government

Kochi: The Kerala High Court on Tuesday expressed its displeasure with the affidavit filed by the State Government in response to certain queries raised by the court on the grant of title deeds by the former deputy tahsildar M.K. Raveendran in Munnar.

When the writ petition challenging the cancellation of title deeds issued to Dhanyasree Yathri Nivas in Munnar came up before it, the court orally pointed out that the affidavit did not state under what provisions of the Land Assignment Act, the title deeds had been issued to the Communist Party of India (Marxist) and the Communist Party of India (CPI) offices in Munnar. Besides, the court orally said that the affidavit had not mentioned for what purpose the title deeds had been issued to the party offices.

Oral directive

The court also orally directed the Government to make available records and other details regarding the grant of title deed to the party offices.

The Additional Advocate-General said that the title deeds had been issued to individuals and not party offices. In fact, it was verifying the validity and legality of the 466 title deeds issued to various persons on the recommendations of the Land Assignment Committee. The Vigilance Department had already started investigation into the bogus title deeds issued in Munnar.

The court had earlier directed the Government to inform it as to which title deeds, issued by Mr. Raveendran, were proceeded against on the ground that the officer did not have the authority to issue them.

The court had also directed the Government to inform it whether Mr. Raveendran had been specifically authorised to issue the title deeds or not.

The judge had directed the Government to explain whether the same officer had issued title deeds in favour of the two parties (CPI and CPI-M) as contended by the petitioners.

If so, whether they had been proceeded against and, if not, the reason for the same.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Front Page