Kerala High Court

Sasidharan And Others vs State Of Kerala And Others on 24 November, 2021

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
 WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA,
                              1943
                    WP(C) NO. 730 OF 2011
PETITIONERS:

    1     SASIDHARAN
          RESIDING AT SAJI MANDIRAM,PP
          IX/548,KARUVELIL.P.O,, PAVITHRESWARAM
          PANCHAYATH,KOLLAM DISTRICT.

    2     RADHA, W/O.SASIDHARAN,AGED 62 YEARS
          RESIDING AT DO- DO.

    3     GIRIJA, D/O.CHELLAMMA,AGED 43 YEARS
          RESIDING AT CHARUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU,KARUVELIL,,
          PAVITHRESWARAM PANCHAYATH,KOLLAM DISTRICT.

    4     MOHANAN, S/O.KUNCHU PILLAI, AGED 50 YEARS
          RESIDING AT KURAKKOTTU VEEDU,EDAVATTOM,KOLLAM.

    5     MANI, W/O.MOHANAN, AGED 44 YEARS
          RESIDING AT DO- DO.

    6     JEBIN,S/O.DINESH KUMAR, AGED 25 YEARS
          RESIDING AT JEBIN MANDIRAM,KARUVELIL,,
          PAVITHRESWARAM PANCHAYATH,KOLLAM DISTRICT.

    7     REKHA RAJ, W/O.JEBIN, AGED 23 YEARS
          RESIDING AT DO- DO.

    8     SUSEELA, D/O.VILASINI, AGED 35 YEARS
          RESIDING AT PONGOTTU HOUSE,KURA,, THALAVOOR
          VILLAGE,KOLLAM DISTRICT.

          BY ADVS.
          SRI.G.P.SHINOD
          SRI.P.GOVIND
          SRI.RAM MOHAN.G.
 W.P.(C).No.730/2011

                             2



RESPONDENTS:

    1      STATE OF KERALA
           CHIEF SECRETARY,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001

    2      THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, KOTTARAKKARA-691506

    3      THE ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE
           KOTTARAKKARA-691506

    4      N.REMANAN, VADAKKOTTU HOUSE, THEVALAPPURAM
           WEST, NEDUVATHOOR VILLAGE,KOLLAM DISTRICT-
           690101.

           BY ADV SRI.DILIP J. AKKARA

OTHER PRESENT:

           SMT.RASHMI.K.M, SR.GP


        THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 24.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C).No.730/2011

                                            3



                     P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                      --------------------------------
                       W.P.(C).No.730 of 2011
               ----------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 24th day of November, 2021


                                     JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed with following prayers:

i. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order or direction calling for the records leading to exhibits P6 and P7 notices and quash the same.

ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction commanding the respondents 1 to 3 and all officers under them not to dispossess the petitioners from their properties comprised in Re Sy Nos: 203/21, 203/18, 203/19, 203/20 and 203/7 (Old Sy No: 426/5) of Pavithreswaram Village and not to trespass into the said properties for any purpose whatsoever. iii. Grant such other and further reliefs that are deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. According to the petitioners, they are owners and in

possession of landed properties with residential buildings

comprised in Re.Sy. Nos. 203/21, 203/18, 203/19, 203/20 and

203/7 (Old Sy. No.426/5) of Pavithreswaram Village by virtue W.P.(C).No.730/2011

of Exts.P1 to P5 sale deeds. It is the case of the petitioners

that they and their predecessors-in-interest have been in

possession of the said properties for the past several decades

as absolute title holders. While so, the petitioners received

Ext.P6 notice issued by the 3rd respondent alleging that the 4th

respondent had approached the Committee on Petitions of the

Kerala Legislative Assembly praying that the 90 cents of the

property assigned to his father Daivathan Nanu as per LA

No.297/60, comprised in Old Sy.No.426/5-187 of

Pavithreswaram Village from which he was dispossessed by

one Malayil Ayyappan Gangadharan and children about 40

years ago be restored to him. It is also stated in the notice

that the present owners of the said properties were all

successors-in-interest of the above Gangadharan who claimed

right over the said property by virtue of Document No: 3955 of

1952. The said Gangadharan was not even a party to the said

document and all documents created with regard to the

property covered by the assignment in favour of Daivathan

Nanu is illegal as per the notice. The Committee on Petitions

of the Legislative Assembly ordered restoration of the said

property to the 4th respondent. The petitioners were called W.P.(C).No.730/2011

upon to appear before the 3rd respondent on 27.12.2010 and

show cause. Since 27.12.2010 was a holiday, no hearing took

place on that day. Thereafter the petitioners were served with

Ext.P7 notice calling upon them to appear for hearing on

06.01.2011. The petitioners, on 06.01.2011, submitted a

detailed written objection before the 3rd respondent.

According to the petitioners, Exts.P6 and P7 notices are

manifestly and apparently erroneous and patently illegal. It is

the case of the petitioners that the proceedings initiated

against them are unsustainable.

3. When this writ petition came up for consideration,

this Court admitted the writ petition and stayed all further

proceedings pursuant to Exts.P6 and P7 for a period of two

months, which was subsequently extended until further

orders. Even now the proceedings initiated based on Exts.P6

and P7 are kept in abeyance in the light of the interim order

passed by this Court.

4. A counter affidavit is filed by the 2nd respondent

narrating the facts and disputing the averments in the writ

petition.

5. When this writ petition came up for consideration W.P.(C).No.730/2011

on 09.11.2021, the counsel who was appearing for the 4 th

respondent submitted that the 4th respondent is no more.

Today, the counsel for the petitioners submitted that his clients

were not able to find out the legal heirs of the 4 th respondent.

The counsel submitted that Exts.P6 and P7 notices are

unsustainable and the proceedings based on Exts.P6 and P7

may be quashed.

6. I considered the contentions of the petitioners and

the Government Pleader. Admittedly Exts.P6 and P7 notices

were issued based on a complaint filed by the deceased 4 th

respondent before the Legislative Assembly Petition

Committee of SC/ST. The petitioners were not heard before

proceeding with the same. Exts.P6 and P7 were issued by the

3rd respondent. The petitioners already submitted their reply

to Exts.P6 and P7. I think this writ petition can be disposed of

directing the 3rd respondent to consider the grievance of the

petitioners and pass appropriate orders. If there is any civil

dispute about the property, the 3 rd respondent shall not pass

any order and shall refer the matter for redressal before the

civil court. There can be a direction to the 3 rd respondent to

complete the enquiry based on Exts.P6 and P7 within a time W.P.(C).No.730/2011

frame, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner

and also the legal heirs of the 4th respondent.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed in the following

manner:

1. The 3rd respondent will conclude the

proceedings initiated based on Exts.P6 and P7,

after giving an opportunity of hearing to the

petitioners and the legal heirs of the 4th

respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at

any rate, within four months from the date of

receipt of a copy of this judgment.

2. If the 3rd respondent came to the conclusion

after the enquiry that it is a civil dispute, the

3rd respondent will allow the parties to

approach the civil court for redressal of their

grievances, in accordance to law.

3. Till final orders are passed as directed above,

the petitioners shall not be dispossessed from

their properties.

sd/-

                                          P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JV                                               JUDGE
 W.P.(C).No.730/2011






                  APPENDIX OF WP(C) 730/2011

PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1        A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SALE DEED NO:
                  875 OF 1990 OF THE KOTTARAKKARA SRO.
Exhibit P2        A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SALE DEED NO: