Kerala High Court
Muthuraja vs The State Of Kerala on 21 November, 2024
Author: Anil K.Narendran
Bench: Anil K.Narendran
1
WP(C) No.9944 of 2016
2024:KER:88639
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALEE KRISHNA S.
THURSDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 30TH KARTHIKA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 9944 OF 2016
PETITIONERS:
1 MUTHURAJA
AGED 37 YEARS
S/O. SETHU, MEENAMBIKKAI FINANCE, G.H.ROAD, MUNNAR,
IDUKKI DISTRICT.
2 N. SOMASUNDARAM
AGED 63 YEARS
S/O. V.R. NACHYAPPAN, SAKTHI FINANCE, MUNNAR, IDUKKI
DISTRICT.37
3 S. DHANASELVAN
AGED 46 YEARS
S/O. SAHADEVA NADAR, NEW COLONY, MUNNAR, IDUKKI
DISTRICT.
4 K.P. JOSE
AGED 62 YEARS
S/O. K.A. PAILY, KOOTTICKAL HOSUE, NALLATHANNY ROAD,
MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT.
5 K. KUMAR
AGED 39 YEARS
S/O. KALI PANDY, M.P.K. TRANDERS, G.H.ROAD, MUNNAR,
IDUKKI DISTRICT.
BY ADV SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
RESPONDENTS:
2
WP(C) No.9944 of 2016
2024:KER:88639
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
COLLECTORATE, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685001.
3 THE TAHSILDAR TALUK OFFICE
DEVIKULAM IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN-685612.
4 THE ADDITIONAL TAHASILDAR
DEVIKULAM TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN-685612.
5 SPECIAL OFFICER AND SPECIAL TAHASILDAR MUNNAR
IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN-685612.
6 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
K.D.H. VILLAGE, MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN-685612.
7 MUNNAR GRAMA PANCHAYATH
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MUNNAR GRAMA PANCHAYATH
OFFICE, MOOLAKADAI, MUNNAR, KERALA 685612... IS
IMPLEADED AS ADDL.R7 AS PER ORDER DATED 07.11.2024 IN
I.A. 1/2024 OF WP(C).
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI. JAFFER KHAN Y., SR. GP; SRI. ARUN THOMAS,SC,
MUNNAR GRAMA PANCHAYATH
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
21.11.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
3
WP(C) No.9944 of 2016
2024:KER:88639
JUDGMENT
MURALEE KRISHNA S.,J.
This writ petition is filed by the petitioners under Article 226
of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of certiorari to quash
Ext P-34 notice dated 03.03.2016 issued by the 3rd respondent -
Tahsildar, Devikulam, directing the petitioners to vacate from the
property comprised in survey No. 62/4 of KDH Village, stating that
they unauthorisedly occupied Government puramboke land and if
they did not vacate the property within 48 hours of receipt of the
said notice, they will be evicted under Section 10(1) and (2) of the
Kannan Devan Hills (Resumption of Lands) Act, 1971.
2. On 15.03.2016, when this matter came up for
consideration, this Court granted an order of status-quo for a
period of two weeks and it was subsequently extended from time
to time.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the
respondents 1 to 6 and the learned Standing Counsel appearing
for the additional 7th respondent.
2024:KER:88639
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit
that the petitioners are in occupation of different shop rooms lying
in a raw, under the additional 7th respondent-Munnar Grama
Panchayat. They have been conducting business in those rooms
for the past more than 30 years. Proceedings were initiated by
the Panchayath when they attempted to do maintenance work to
the rooms. Ext P-34 notice was issued alleging that the petitioners
have trespassed to Sirkar Puramboke and directing them to vacate
from the rooms within 48 hours. No opportunity was given to the
petitioners to explain their version before issuing Ext P-34 notice.
5. The learned Government Pleader as well as the learned
Standing counsel appearing for the additional 7th respondent
would submit that proceedings in pursuance to Ext P34 notice will
be finalised only after giving opportunity to the petitioners to
explain their part.
6. Ext P-34 notice would show that prior to issuing the
said notice, no opportunity was given to the petitioners to explain
their version. In Ext P-34, it is mentioned that it is as directed by
this court in the order dated 12.08.2015 in W.P(C)No.15605 of
2024:KER:88639
2014, the petitioners have been directed to vacate the property.
7. The perusal of the judges' papers in W.P(C)No.15605 of
2014 would show that it was a writ petition filed under Article 226
of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus
commanding respondents 1 to 7 therein to take immediate action
to evict respondents 8 to 12 therein from the revenue puramboke
and to demolish the illegal construction they have made in
violation of the Kerala Land Conservancy Act, 1957 as well as the
Kerala Panchayat Building Rules 2011 and also seeking a writ of
mandamus commanding the 1st respondent therein to initiate
effective and meaningful action against the erring officers for their
failure to take timely action to prevent encroachments on
Government land. As per an interim order dated 12.08.2015
passed in the said writ petition by a Division Bench of this Court,
respondents 3, 4 and 7 therein were directed to take appropriate
steps for issuing notice to the unauthorised occupants and take
necessary action to remove the illegal encroachment in
accordance with the procedure prescribed. They were directed to
file a report of the action taken within a period of four weeks from
2024:KER:88639
the date of receipt of a copy of that order. However, records would
show that the said writ petition was not pressed by the petitioner
therein and accordingly, it was dismissed on 04.07.2023. While
dismissing the writ petition, it was made clear by the Division
Bench that the Authorities are free to act in accordance with the
stop memo already issued in accordance with law. Nowhere in the
interim order or in the final order passed in W.P(C)No.15605 of
2014 this Court has directed the revenue authorities to evict the
encroachers without following the procedure prescribed under law.
In the order dated 12.08.2015 as well as in the final order dated
04.07.2023 passed in W.P(C)No.15605 of 2014, it was made clear
that the revenue authorities shall take necessary steps to remove
the illegal encroachments only following the procedure prescribed.
8. Since no opportunity was seen given to the petitioners to
explain their part before ordering them to vacate as per Ext P-34
notice, we deem it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition by
directing the 3rd respondent - Tahsildar to finalise the proceedings
initiated by virtue of Ext P-34 notice after giving the parties
concerned an opportunity to file statements before him explaining
2024:KER:88639
their version for occupying the properties in survey No.62/4 of
KDH Village.
Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd
respondent - Tahsildar, Devikulam of Idukki district to finalise the
proceedings initiated by virtue of Ext P-34 notice, following the
procedure prescribed, as early as possible, at any rate, within a
period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy
of this order, after affording the petitioners and the 7th respondent
to make written submissions and to produce the relevant
documents if any before him. The interim order of status quo
granted by this court will remain in force till such disposal.
Sd/-
ANIL K.NARENDRAN
JUDGE
Sd/-
MURALEE KRISHNA S.,
JUDGE
sks/25.11.2024
2024:KER:88639
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9944/2016
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXT.P1. TRUE COPY OF THE PARTITION DEED NO.
2672/1998 DATED 18-11-1998.
EXT.P2. TRUE COPY OF THE OWNERSHIP
CERTIFICATE NO. A4-216/2000 DATED 7-4-2000
EXT.P3. TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED BEDARING
NO. 149/03 DATED 16-09-2003.
EXT.P4. TRUE COPY OF THE OWNERSHIP
CERTIFICATE DATED 3-4-2006 HAVING NO. A3-
10/2015.
EXT.P5. TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE ISSUED BY
THE INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, DEVIKULAM
DATED 12-9-2002.
EXT.P6. TRUE COPY OF THE SALE AGREEMENT
DATED 16-3-2009.
EXT.P7. TRUE COPY OF THE SPECIAL POWER OF
ATTORNEY DATED 16-3-2009.
EXT.P8. TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE DATED 4-
10-1989.
EXT.P9. TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE DATED 16-
12-2006.
EXT.P10. TRUE COPY OF THE UNREGISTERED SALE
DEED.
EXT.P11. TRUE COPY OF THE OWNERSHIP
CERTIFICATE DATED 20-3-2013.
EXT.P12. A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN
O.S. NO. 217/1993 DATED 8-11-1995.
2024:KER:88639
EXT.P13. A TRUE COPY OF THE DECREE IN O.S.
NO. 217/1993 DATED 8-11-2015.
EXT.P14. TRUE COPY OF THE SALE AGREEMENT
DATED 16-3-2009.
EXT.P15. TRUE COPY OF THE SPECIAL POWER OF
ATTORNEY DATED 16-3-2009.
EXT.P16. TRUE COPY OF THE PLAN SUBMITTED BY
THE SECOND PETITIONER.
EXT.P17. TRUE COPY OF THE PLAN SUBMITTED BY
THE THIRD PETITIONER.
EXT.P18. TRUE COPY OF THE PLAN SUBMITTED BY
THE FOURTH PETITIONER.
EXT.P19.TRUE COPY OF THE PLAN SUBMITTED BY
THE FIFTH PETITIONER.
EXT.P20. TRUE COPY OF THE PERMISSION OF THE
PANCHAYATH DATED 6-9-2013 ISSUED TO THE 1ST
PETITIONER.
EXT.P21.TRUE COPY OF THE PERMISSION OF THE
PANCHAYATH DATED 6-9-2013 ISSUED TO THE 2ND
PETITIONER.
EXT.P22. TRUE COPY OF THE PERMISSION OF THE
PANCHAYATH DATED 6-9-2013 ISSUED TO THE 3RD
PETITIONER.
EXT.P23. TRUE COPY OF THE PERMISSION OF THE
PANCHAYATH DATED 6-9-2013 ISSUED TO THE 4TH
PETITIONER.
EXT.P24. TRUE COPY OF THE PERMISSION OF THE
PANCHAYATH DATED 6-9-2013 ISSUED TO THE 5TH
PETITIONER.
EXT.P25. TRUE COPY OF THE PROHIBITION ORDER
ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT ON 14-9-2013
TO THE PETITIONERS.
2024:KER:88639
EXT.P26. TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION OF
THE 1ST PETITIONER SUBMITTED TO THE RDO.
EXT.P27.TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION OF
THE 2ND PETITIONER SUBMITTED TO THE RDO.
EXT.P28.TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION OF
THE 4TH PETITIONER SUBMITTED TO THE RDO.
EXT.P29.TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION OF
THE 5TH PETITIONER SUBMITTED TO THE RDO.
EXT.P30.A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY
THE RDO DATED 17-10-2013.
EXT.P31. TRUE COPIES OF THE ORDERS NO.
A2/2116/12 DATED 29-10-2013 ISSUED TO THE
PETITIONERS.
EXT.P32. A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE
3RD RESPONDENT DATED 5-11-2013.
EXT.P33. A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC
NO. 28769 OF 2013 DATED 29-11-2013 OF THIS
HON'BLE COURT.
EXT.P34. A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED
DATED 3-3-2016.
