Kerala High Court
E.J.Mathews vs State Of Kerala on 20 August, 1984
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN
TUESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2012/14TH CHAITHRA 1934
WP(C).No. 8452 of 2012 (F)
--------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-------------
1. E.J.MATHEWS, AGED 59 YEARS
EDACKATTU HOUSE, VALLAKKADAVU.P.O.
VANDIPERIYAR-685533.(LA 48/84)
2. P.I. ABDUL KHADER,
PUTHUPARAMBIL VALLAKKADAVU.P.O.
VANDIPERIYAR-685533.(LA 53/84)
3. THANKAMMA
W/O. M.P. GOPI (DIED) PUTHENPURACKAL
VALLAKKADAVU.P.O., VANDIPERIYAR-685533.(LA50/84)
4. SKARIA KURIAKOSE
VAYALIL VALLAKKADAVU.P.O.
VANDIPERIYAR-685533.(LA 52/84)
5. THOMAS JOSEPH
VALLAKKADAVU.P.O., VANDIPERIYAR-685533.(LA 53/94)
6. JOSEPH CHACKO
EDAKKADU,VALLAKKADAVU.P.O.
VANDIPERIYAR-685533.(LA50/84)
BY ADVS.SRI.S.K.MURALEEDHARA KAIMAL
SRI.A.K.MADHAVAN UNNI
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-01.
2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR
IDUKKI, PAINAVU.P.O., PIN-685001.
3. TAHSILDAR
PEERUMADU TALUK, PEERUMADU.P.O., PIN-685531.
4. FOREST RANGE OFFICER
GRASS LAND DIVISION, KUMILY.P.O.
IDUKKI DISTRICT-685509.
LSN --2--
--2--
WP(C).No. 8452 of 2012 (F)
5. DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER
GRASS LAND DIVISION, KUMILY.P.O.
IDUKKI DISTRICT-685509.
6. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR
LAND ASSIGNMENT, PEERUMADU TALUK OFFICE
PEERUMADU-685531.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. AJ JOSE
BY SRI.M.P.MADHAVANKUTTY, SPL. GOVT. PLEADER FOR FOREST
DEPARTMENT
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03-04-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
LSN
WP(C).No. 8452 of 2012 (F)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
P1: COPY OF THE PATTA DATED 20-08-1984.
P1(a): COPY OF THE TAX RECEIOT DATED 05.08.2004
P2: COPY OF THE COMMON CANCELLATION ORDER DATED 28.06.1989 IN
RESPECT OF THE PATTA GRANTED TO THE 4TH PETITIONER.
P3: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.49086/L1/89/RD, DATED 21.07.1989
P4: COPY OF THE DECREE IN O.S. 332/97 PASSED BY THE MUNSIFF
COURT, PEERMADU.
P5: COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 20/8/97 BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
P5(a): COPY OF THE REPORT AFTER VERIFICATION ON THE SPOT, DATED
22/05/1997 OF THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ISSUED THROUGH THE
VANDIPERIYAR FIRKA REVENUE INSPECTOR.
P6: COPY OF THE NO OBJECTION DATED 28.08.1984 ISSUED TO THE 6TH
RESPONDENT BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
P7: COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 15/04/2000 BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
P8: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 05.02.2007 SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER AND OTHERS.
P8(a): COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD, RECEIVED ON 09/03/07 BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT.
P8(b): COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD, RECEIVED ON 09.03.07 BY THE
3RD RESPONDENT.
P9: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 02.09.2011 IN WPC NO.10229/2007
PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT.
P10: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.KD IS 35759/11/C2, DATED 06.03.2012 OF
THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
P11: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS IN NO.C3-27388/86, DATED 16/08/06 BY
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
P12: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS IN NO.C5-5790/95 DATED 17/08/06 BY
THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
LSN
S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C)No.8452 of 2012
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 3rd day of April, 2012
J U D G M E N T
The petitioners were issued with a patta assigning certain lands to them. Alleging that the land assigned to the petitioners were in excess of the extent of land available for actual assignment, the same was cancelled by the concerned Tahsildar. That led to Ext.P9 judgment in W.P.(C) No.10229/2007, wherein I had directed the District Collector to consider every aspect of the matter in accordance with the law applicable. Pursuant thereto, the District Collector has passed Ext.P10 order rejecting the claim of the petitioners. It is under the above circumstances, the petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs:
"(a) To issue a writ of certiorari or other writ or order calling for the entire files/records leading to Ext.P2 order against all the petitioners and Ext.P10, common order against the petitioners and quash the same;
(b) to declare that the petitioners are entitled for restoration of their cancelled pattas and subsequent title deeds;W.P.(C)No.8452 of 2012 -2-
(c) To issue a writ of prohibition or other writ or order prohibiting the respondents 2 to 6 from interfering with the rights, possession and enjoyment of the properties by the petitioners on the basis of the impugned Ext.P10 order of the 2nd respondent;"
2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also.
3. In Ext.P10 order the reason given by the Collector for rejecting the claim of the petitioners is as follows:
"On perusal of the Kerala Land Assignment Act 1960 and the Kerala Land Assignment Rules 1964 it is found that the legislature has not considered the issue of restoration of cancelled Pattas. As such it is found that there are no enabling provisions in the Kerala Land Assignment Rules 1964 for the restoration of cancelled pattas of the petitioners as requested by them in the Ext.P8 representation."
When the petitioners are challenging the cancellation of the patta it is strange that the District Collector takes the stand that there is no provision in the Kerala Land Assignment Act and Rules for restoration of cancellation of the pattas. When pattas are cancelled and against such action appeal, revision or representation is filed before the District Collector, he is expected to consider the validity of the cancellation, for which, no separate provision is necessary in the Act and Rules. His power of W.P.(C)No.8452 of 2012 -3- appeal/revision contains all such powers. Therefore, the reasoning in Ext.P10 is clearly faulty. Accordingly, Ext.P10 order is quashed. The District Collector is directed to reconsider the validity of the challenge against the order cancelling the pattas after giving an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners and pass fresh orders on merits, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Status quo as on today shall be continued till then in respect of the properties in question.
Sd/-
S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE //True copy// P.A. TO JUDGE shg/