IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2010 / 13TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 14949 of 2010(P) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. GANESAN, SON OF IRULAPPAN, SILENT VALLEY ROAD, MUNNAR. 2. MURUKAN, SON OF GANESAN, SILENT VALLEY ROAD, MUNNAR. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE TAHSILDAR, DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. M.P.SREEKRISHNAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/06/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 14949 of 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioners are owners of certain lands in Kannan Devan Hills Village. On an allegation that the patta issued to the petitioners in respect of the properties are bogus, proceedings for cancellation of the patta have been initiated. Originally Ext.P3 order was passed against the petitioner. Petitioner filed Ext.P4 appeal before the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent issued Ext.P6 notice for a hearing. The petitioners submitted Ext.P7 application seeking copies of certain documents. However the petitioners allege that the 2nd respondent has taken the appeal for orders without making available the documents sought for and without giving the petitioners an opportunity to controvert the same, which documents are proposed to be relied on by the appellate authority. It is under the W.P.(C)No. 14949 of 2010 -2- above circumstances the petitioners have filed this writ petition, seeking the following reliefs: “a) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order directing the 2nd respondent to provide the petitioners with the documents sought in Exhibit P-7. b) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order directing the 2nd respondent to take up and dispose off Exhibit P-7. c) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order directing the 2nd respondent not to proceed with Exhibit P-4 appeal without providing the petitioners the documents sought as per Exhibit P-7 and without providing them an opportunity of hearing.” 2. The following are the documents copies of which are requested for by the petitioners. 1. Copy of the order of the Tahsildar, Devicolam, on the alleged charge against us. 2. Copy of the Survey and demarcation details, sketch submitted by the Village Officer, K D H, along with his report to Tahsildar. 3. Any other document/s relied by the Tahsildar, Devicolam and this Hon'ble Authority on the above. 3. I had directed the Government Pleader to obtain instructions as to whether these documents are necessary for disposal of the appeal and whether the copies of documents have been supplied to the petitioners. The W.P.(C)No. 14949 of 2010 -3- learned Government Pleader on instructions submits that, as far as the first document referred to in Ext.P7 is concerned, that is the order against which the petitioners have filed the appeal and the same is already in possession of the petitioners. As far as the 2nd document is concerned, he would point out that the petitioners can very well get a copy of the same from the concerned Village Officer. Having heard both sides, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: As far as the first document is concerned the petitioners are already in possession of the same and it is not necessary to supply another copy of the same to the petitioners. As far as the 2nd & 3rd documents are concerned, the 2nd respondent shall afford an opportunity to the petitioners to peruse all those documents in the office of the 2nd respondent on a specific date and thereupon the 2nd respondent shall hear the petitioners again on W.P.(C)No. 14949 of 2010 -4- another date before passing final orders in the matter. S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE shg/