IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH APRIL 2008 / 20TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 10827 of 2008(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- K.M.JOSEPH BINOY, MANAGING DIRECTOR, K.J.M.RESORTS INDIA (P) LTD., CHINNAKANAL-685 619, SOORYANELLY P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN SRI.T.S.SHYAM PRASANTH RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, IDUKKI. 3. THE TASK FORCE, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER AND DEPUTY COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, IDUKKI. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK, NEDUMKANDAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 5. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, CHINNAKANAL, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.D.ANIL KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/04/2008, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 11455 OF 2008 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NOs. 10827 & 11455 OF 2008 ========================= Dated this the 9th day of April, 2008 J U D G M E N T In WP(C) No.10827/08, petitioner claims ownership of the property covered by Exts. P1 and P2. It is stated that Exts.P3, P4 and P25 are the pattas in relation to the aforesaid property. Petitioner also is referring to Ext.P5, a sketch prepared by the revenue officials themselves in 1999 and submits that the property covered by the sketch is the one in their possession and covered by the aforesaid documents. 2. In so far as the petitioner in WP(C) No.11455/08 is concerned, Exts. P2, P3 and P4 are the pattas and the property has been purchased by the petitioner by Ext.P1 title deed. He also refers to Exts. P5, P6 and P7 sketches to assert his ownership over the property covered by the documents referred to above. 3. These writ petitions have been filed by these petitioners on receipt of notices issued by the 4th respondent Tahsildar. 4. In so far as the petitioner in WP(C) No.10827/08 is concerned, he has been issued Ext.P20 notice in response to which he has filed Exts. P21 and P26 objections. Petitioner in WP(C) No.11455/08 has been served WPC 10827 & 11455 /08 :2 : Ext.P10 notice to which he has filed Ext.P11 objections. 5. The apprehension of the petitioners is that without considering the objections that are filed and without even conducting a survey, the land mentioned in the notices, which is now in their possession is likely to be taken over from them. According to the petitioner in WP(C) No.10827/08, he has constructed a three star resort and that if the land is taken over as proposed in the notice, that will result in demolition of the resort as well. Petitioner in WP(C) No.11455/08 has partially constructed a resort and is in the process of completing the same. 6. From the facts disclosed by the parties, it is evident that the petitioners are claiming ownership of the land covered by the title deeds referred to above and are also tracing their titles to the pattas that are produced. When the notices were issued, they have also filed their replies asserting ownership over the properties. In such circumstances fairness demands that their explanation should be considered by the 4th respondent and they should also be given an opportunity to canvass their contentions that they have urged in the replies that have been filed. Similarly, I also find it reasonable that the respondents should get the land surveyed before proceeding further with the matter. WPC 10827 & 11455 /08 :3 : 7. Therefore, these writ petitions are disposed of directing that the 4th respondent shall consider the replies filed by the petitioners herein to Exts.P20 and Ext.P10 notices issued to the petitioners in the light of the replies filed by them and shall afford them an opportunity of hearing also. It is also directed that before final orders are passed, the 4th respondent should also arrange for a survey of the properties. 8. Until orders are passed as above with notice to the petitioners, all further proceedings in pursuance to the notices referred to above will stand stayed. Writ petitions are disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC,JUDGE. Rp