IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 30TH JUNE 2008 / 9TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 7276 of 2007(N) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ---------------- SMT. MARIYUMMA, W/O MEETHIANKUNJU, KALLUPURACKAL HOUSE, BHARATHAMATHA COLLEGE P.O., THRIKKAKARA. BY ADV. SRI.JOHN K.GEORGE RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, FORT KOCHI. 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KAKKANAD. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, KANAYANNUR. 4. M.C.VALLON, MANNARKUZHIYIL HOUSE, THENGODE P.O. BY ADV. SRI.JOSEPH FRANKLIN GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P.N. SANTHOSH KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 7276 of 2007 EXT.P1: COPY OF TITLE DEED DT. 21.10.1970 EXT.P2: COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT FOR THE YTEAR 1991 DT. 31.12.91. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT FOR THE YEAR 1997 DTD. 12.8.97. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE BANK DT. 16.1.2007. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DTD. 4.3.92 BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE SKETCH ISSUED BY THE RE-SURVEY DEPARTMENT EXT.P7: COPY OF THE ORDER RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER IN JANUARY, 2007 BY R1. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE. S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.7276 OF 2007 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of June, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner challenges Ext.P7 order passed by the 1st respondent cancelling the mutation effected in favour of the petitioner in respect of certain properties. The petitioner's main contention is that Ext.P7 order has been passed without affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. Ext.P7 order does not state as to whether the petitioner has been heard or not. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 3rd respondent in which, it is also not stated that the petitioner has been heard. The learned counsel for the 4th respondent also is not in a position to assert either way. In the above circumstances, I am satisfied that Ext.P7 order has been passed without hearing the petitioner. Accordingly, Ext.P7 order is quashed. The 1st respondent shall pass fresh orders in the matter after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as well as the 4th respondent, as expeditiously as W.P.(c)No.7276/08 2 possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Acd