IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH MAY 2011 / 4TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 13402 of 2011(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- K.M.MAJEED, KOOTTUNGAL HOUSE, PORKULAM P.O., VIA PAZHANJI, TRICHUR-680 542. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.ABDUL SAMMAD SRI.V.D.BALAKRISHNA KARTHA RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM-1. 2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ROADS SUB DIVISION, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, THALAPPILLY, TRICHUR-680 582. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.13402 OF 2011 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of May 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is stated as aggrieved of Ext.P1 notice/order issued by the 2nd respondent with reference to Rule 13A of the Kerala Land Conservancy Rules, whereby the petitioner has been asked to demolish the building in question situated in the property concerned. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner purchased the above property for valid sale consideration and constructed the building therein and was enjoying the same with absolute ownership, clear title and exclusive possession for more than five decades. Many a ground has been raised in the Writ Petition with regard to the legal aspects involved, challenging the sustainability of Ext.P1 order (though styled as a notice), passed without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 2. Heard the learned Govt. Pleader as well, who fairly submits that Ext.P1 can be treated as a 'notice', with liberty to the petitioner to file objection and that the matter can be finalised accordingly. 3. In the above circumstances, it is declared that Ext.P1 shall be treated as a 'notice' to be issued under Section 12 of the Act and the petitioner may file objection, if any, within two W.P.(C) No.13402/2011 2 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, on which event, the same shall be considered and appropriate orders shall be passed by the concerned authority (R2) in accordance with law, after hearing the petitioner within a period of two months thereafter. 4. 'Status quo' will continue till such time. 5. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the Writ Petition before the 2nd respondent while submitting the statement of objections as above, for taking further steps. Writ Petition is disposed of. vdv P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE