IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 27TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 3494 of 2009(N) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. BABU CHERIAN, 7 C, TOC H RETREAT, VYTTILA, KOCHI - 19. 2. GRACE THOMAS, MANIMURIYIL HOUSE, BANK ROAD, KOZHIKODE. 3. THOMAS MATHEW, MANIMURIYIL HOUSE, BANK ROAD, KOZHIKODE. 4. JOSE JOSEPH, KALLIVAYALIL HOUSE, KALAKETTY, KOTTAYAM. 5. BOBBY ZACHARIA, VELLOOKUNNEL HOUSE, SURIANELLY, IDUKKI. 6. RANI THANKACHAN, KALLARIKAL KADAVIL, CHERTHALA. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, UDUMBANCHOLA AT NEDUMKANDAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. M.P.SREEKRISHNAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/02/2009, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 3687 OF 2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC,J. ----------------------- W.P.(C).Nos.3494 &3687 OF 2009 ------------------------ Dated this the 16th day of February, 2009. JUDGMENT In WP(c).No.3494/09, according to the petitioners, 3 acres of lad were assigned to their predecessor in interest as per the proceedings in LA.No. 117/1790. It is stated that at present, petitioners 1 to 6, except petitioner No.2, own this extent of land. They were issued Exts.P1 to P6, by which the 2nd respondent called upon them to show cause why patta shall not be cancelled. On receipt of Exts.P1 to P6 and on seeing that several documents have been relied on, petitioners filed Exts.P7 to P12 requesting the 2nd respondent to issue copies of the document. 2. Similarly, in WP(c).No. 3687/09, petitioners are the owners of 1 acre and 96 cents. They were issued Ext.P2 calling upon them to show cause against the proposal for cancellation of the Patta. On its receipt similar to Exts.P7 to WP(c).Nos.3494/09 & aor. 2 P12 referred to above, here also they have given Exts.P3 to P6 requesting for copies of the document relied on against them. Complaining that without issuing copies sought for, proceedings are being continued, the writ petition has been filed. 3. Learned Government Pleader has instructions in the matter. He submits that the documents requested for by the petitioners are voluminous and is not practicable to issue copies. But however Government Pleader offers that it will be open to the petitioners or their representative to peruse the documents before the show case notice is finally decided. 4. In view of the submission made by the Government Pleader I think it is only appropriate that the petitioners are given an opportunity to peruse the documents relied on against the petitioners in the show cause notices that have been issued against them. Such opportunity shall be extend by the respondents before final orders are passed in pursuance to the show cause notices referred above. WP(c).Nos.3494/09 & aor. 3 Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions. I. The 2nd respondent shall offer an opportunity to the petitioners or their representatives to peruse the documents that are relied on against them. ii. Such opportunity will be given before final orders are passed and orders will be passed on the show cause notices with notice to them, Petitioners shall produce a copy of the judgment before the 2nd respondent who shall immediately render an opportunity as stated above. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WP(c).Nos.3494/09 & aor. 4