Kerala HC upholds bifurcation of land allotted to Milma in Munnar

Kochi: High court has upheld the govt's decision to bifurcate 130 cents of land from a two-acre plot in Munnar, where the Milma chilling plant is currently located, and to allot it to Kerala State Livestock Development Board for a new central govt scheme.A bench of Justice C Jayachandran issued the order while dismissing a petition filed by the Ernakulam Regional Co-operative Milk Producers' Union, which had challenged the govt's land transfer order of June 11, 2025. The union contended in its petition that a 99-year lease granted over the said land to Kerala Co-operative Milk Marketing Federation (Milma) could not be revoked and resumed in the manner reflected in the impugned order.However, the govt opposed this contention, arguing that there was no concluded lease as claimed by the union; that the chilling plant at Munnar, located on the said two acres, had not been transferred to the union; and that its mere possession could be revoked and resumed for a central govt scheme. The two acres of puramboke land in KDH Village had originally been transferred to the then dairy development department in 1969 for the establishment of a milk chilling plant. It was further contended that the impugned order allowed Milma to retain 70 cents of land for use as a marketing hub and training centre currently operated by the union. This portion of land also includes the old chilling plant building.HC noted that Rule 15(4) of the Kerala Land Assignment Rules, 1964, empowers the competent authority to terminate a lease after giving 60 days' written notice to the assignee if the land is required for govt or public purposes. It further observed that since the land in question is govt land given on lease, it is governed by the Kerala Govt Land Assignment Act and the Rules framed thereunder.Additionally, HC observed that the govt had established the necessity of using the land for the board, which constitutes a public purpose. It also noted that only 130 cents of the leased land was being resumed, while the petitioner was permitted to retain 70 cents for its operations. Taking into account the continuous meetings and deliberations held with the petitioner, HC found that sufficient notice had been given. Accordingly, it dismissed the petition.