JUDGMENT D. Sreedevi, J. 1. Petitioner is the Power of Attorney Holder of her children try names Manoj Issac, Vinod Issac, Sunoj Issac and Sunitha Issac. Thekkumparambil late Sri. Issac is the husband of the petitioner. The petitioner's husband's father Manikkat Thekkumparambil Ulahannan got assignment of four items of property having an extent of 28.94 acres of land comprised in R.S.No.62/1, 62/2, 64 and 65 from Sri. M. Narayanan Nair as per registered sale deed No.634/1944. Out of these four items, two items viz. 3.83 acres comprised in R.S.Nos. 6271 and 6.6 acres comprised in R.S.No.62/2 were Government lands. They were granted in Darkast in favour of Narayanan Nair. Sri. Narayanan Nair received a notice issued by the Deputy Tahsildar, Vythiri calling upon him to remit Rs. 165 Ana 4 as tree value, Rs.42 and 13 Annas as land value and Re.1/- as sub division fee with respect to the above property and accordingly he had remitted the said amount on 17-10-1942. Later, he had received another communication wherein he was called upon to remit an amount of Rs.20 ana 11. That was also remitted by him on 11-11-1942. Again he received another notice on 6-5-1943 calling upon him to remit an amount of Rs.20 anas 11 towards land value in respect of the property comprised in R.S.No.62/1. That was also remitted by him on 14-5-1943.Ext.P2 is the receipt issued to Narayanan Nair. Thereafter, Sri. Narayanan Nair assigned the above said property to the petitioner's husband's father, Ulahannan. 2. It is alleged in the petition that Sri. Ulahannan was in exclusive possession and enjoyment of the said property, eversince the date of sale deed. He has also affected valuable improvements in the property. In the meanwhile, on 16-4-1950 the Deputy Tahsildar of Vythiri passed an order under the provisions of the Madras Land Encroachment Act directing Ulahannan to surrender 70 cents of property comprised in R.S.No.62/1. Aggrieved by the said order Ulahannan filed an appeal before the then Collector of Malabar. The appeal was allowed and the eviction proceedings were dropped. Ulahannan was informed that the assignment of land will be issued by the Sub Collector in due course. Ext.P3 is the order of the Collector of Malabar. 3. Thereafter, Ulahannan gifted property measuring 3.51 acres in R.S.No.62/1 and 5.21 acres in R.S.No.62/2 to the petitioner's husband and to his brother Abraham jointly by a gift deed No.995/1958. Thereafter, Sri. Ulahannan was informed that the assignment of land will be issued by the Sub Collector in due course. Ext.P3 is the order of the Collector of Malabar. 3. Thereafter, Ulahannan gifted property measuring 3.51 acres in R.S.No.62/1 and 5.21 acres in R.S.No.62/2 to the petitioner's husband and to his brother Abraham jointly by a gift deed No.995/1958. Thereafter, Sri. Abraham released his right in the said property to the petitioner's husband under Ext.P4. After the death of the petitioner's husband the petitioner and her children are in exclusive possession and enjoyment of the property measuring 3.51 acres in R.S.No.62/1 and 5.21 acres in R.S.62/2. Thereafter, Narayanan Nair, Ulahannan and the petitioner's husband were praying for assignment of lands in their possession. Ext.P6 is the representation filed by the petitioner's husband. The Village Officer, Kottappadi issued Ext.P7 possession certificate to the petitioner. But, the second respondent has not passed any order on Ext.P6. According to the petitioner, the entire amount called for getting assignment of land has been remitted. Since no patta was issued in their favour, they filed O.P.No. 15366/93 before this court and this court directed the second respondent to consider and dispose of the matter. It is alleged in the petition that now she has received a communication issued by the second respondent stating that patta with respect to the said property could be issued only under the provisions of the Kerala Land Assignment Rules and that the petitioner has to remit the market value of the land prevailing in the locality. Ext.P8 is the communication. According to the petitioner Ext.P8 order is arbitrary and illegal. Therefore, she has filed this original petition for a writ of certiorari quashing Ext.P8 and to direct the second respondent to issue patta to the petitioner in respect of property measuring 3.51 acres in R.Sy.No.62/1 and 5.21 acres in R.Sy.No.62/2 of Kottappadi Village in Wynad District. 4. The second respondent filed a counter stating that eventhough Sri.Narayanan Nair remitted the amount to get the land assigned, he had disposed of the land in question to Sri.Ulahannan before getting the land assigned in his favour and obtaining patta. As long as an assignment process has not been completed, the land still remains as Government land. As this transaction was done while the land was owned by the Government as Puramboke, the execution made by Sri. Narayanan Nair has no legal validity. As long as an assignment process has not been completed, the land still remains as Government land. As this transaction was done while the land was owned by the Government as Puramboke, the execution made by Sri. Narayanan Nair has no legal validity. Therefore, Sri.Ulahannan can be treated only as an encroacher. The Board of Revenue examined the matter in detail and held that patta can be issued only under the provisions of the Land Assignment R.1964 for which present market value of the land has to be remitted. Therefore, it is contended that the petitioner has no legal right to claim assignment of land on the basis of the amount remitted by Sri.Narayanan Nair. 5. Petitioner has produced Ext.P2 receipt showing that the land value due for assignment of land has been remitted on 14-5-1943. At that time Narayanan Nair was in possession of the property. Following him the petitioner's husband's father and then the petitioner's husband were in possession. So by transfer and by operation of law possession passed on to the hands of the petitioner. Land Assignment proceedings were initiated in 1943 under Government Grants Act, 1895. The land value was remitted in 1943 itself. The second respondent ought to have granted registry of land on receipt of the land value within a reasonable period. But, the assignment was not granted by the second respondent. The assignment of land was got delayed by the respondents. Now the contention of the respondent is that the petitioner has to remit the present market value of land to get assignment of land under the Kerala Land Assignment Rules, 1964. This contention cannot be accepted as the proceedings initiated under the Government Grants Act have to be deemed to have been initiated under the Land Assignment Act. 6. For assignment of land the land value was remitted as demanded by the State of Madras as per the provisions of Government Grants Act 1895 which governed the assignment of lands in Madras State. Under Clause.3 of S.9 of the Kerala Assignment Act, all Rules and orders in force immediately before the commencement of the said act relating to the assignment of Government lands in Malabar District referred to in sub-section (2) of S.55 of the State Re-Organisation Act, 1956, shall be deemed to have been made under the corresponding provisions of Kerala Land Assignment Act. S.9 of the Kerala Land Assignment Act reads as follows: "Repeals (1) The Travancore-Cochin Government Land . Assignment Act, 1950 (XXXII of 1950), is hereby repealed. (2) The Government Grants Act 1895 (Central Act 15 of 1895) in so far as it relates to any grant or other transfer of land or of any interest therein by or on behalf of the Government of Kerala shall cease to apply to the Malabar District referred to in sub clause (2) of S.5 of the State Reorganisation Act, 1956 (Central Act 37 of 1956). (3) All rules and orders made or deemed to have been made under the Travancore-Cochin Government Land Assignment Act, 1950 hereby repealed, and all rules and orders in force immediately before the commencement of this Act relating to the assignment of Government lands in the Malabar District referred to in sub-section (2) of S.5 of the State Reorganisation Act, 1956 (Central Act 37 of 1956) so far as they are not inconsistent with this Act, shall be deemed to have been made under the corresponding provisions of this Act, and shall continue to be in force accordingly unless and until superseded by anything done or any action taken under this Act". In the result, this original petition is allowed and Ext.P8 order is quashed. The second respondent is directed to issue patta in favour of the petitioner in respect of property measuring 3.51 acres in R.S.No.62/1 and 5.21 acres in R.S.No.62/2 of Kottapadi Village in Wynad District within three months from today.