IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 16TH JULY 2009 / 25TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 20027 of 2009(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- HAMEED, S/O.LATE MIHRAJ MAMMUNHI, ERIYAMPADI, MUTTATHODY VILLAGE, ALAMPADY POST, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN SRI.V.VENUGOPAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE LAND BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LR), LAND TRIBUNAL, KASARAGOD. 3. MOHAMOOD, S/O.ABDUL KHADER, CHERIYA ALAMPADY, MUTTATHODY VILLAGE, ALAMPADY PO, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 4. T.ABDUL KHADER, S/O.T.ABDUL KUNHI, CHERIYA ALAMPADY, MUTTATHODY VILLAGE, ALAMPADY P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 5. T.HAMEED, S/O.T.ABDULLA KUNHI, CHERIYA ALAMPADY, MUTTATHODY VILLAGE, ALAMPADY P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 6. SUHARA, D/O.T.ABDULLA KUNHI, CHERIYA ALAMPADY, MUTTATHODY VILLAGE, ALAMPADY P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 7. ASSYAMMA, W/O.T.ABDULLA KUNHI, CHERIYA ALAMPADY, MUTTATHODY VILLAGE, ALAMPADY P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY GP SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).20027/2009 -------------------- Dated this the 16th day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT Suo motu proceedings have been initiated by the 2nd respondent, under Section 72B of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, in respect of 26 cents of land in the possession of the petitioner, as a legal heir of his father. The contesting respondents herein are parties to the said proceedings. Petitioner claims tenancy in respect of the said land. B party before the land Tribunal moved the State Land Board, Thiruvananthapuram, for a transfer of the proceedings pending before the 2nd respondent to some other competent Land Tribunal. This was dismissed under Ext.P1 order. It seems that they again moved for a transfer before the Land Board itself. This was also dismissed as per Ext.P6. They have now approached the Commissioner of Land Revenue for a transfer of the said proceedings vide Ext.P7. This has been challenged by the petitioner as an abuse of process of law. If earlier applications made for transfer have been dismissed, then obviously this is a matter which has to be specifically considered by the Commissioner of W.P.(C).20027/09 2 Land Revenue before passing orders on Ext.P7. 2. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's contention that earlier applications for transfer have been dismissed by the competent authority, before passing orders on the same. Fresh hearing shall be conducted before a decision is taken on this aspect. The petitioner and respondents 3 to 7 shall be heard. Orders on the application for transfer, after such hearing, shall be passed within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs