IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 1ST SEPTEMBER 2008 / 10TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 8580 of 2006(U) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- VANAM, S/O.SHANMUGHAM, AGED 28 YEARS, LAKSHMI HARIJAN COLONY, ANAVARATTY VILLAGE, PALLIVASAM PANCHAYATH, MUNNAR. BY ADV. SRI.SHAJI P.CHALY RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, FINANCE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SUB COLLECTOR, DEVIKULAM, MUNNAR. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, DEVIKULAM, MUNNAR. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K.J. MOHAMMED ANZAR FOR R.2,3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 8580 of 2006(U) -2- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 16 NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 26/11/2003. EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT 30/01/2004. EXT.P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO. 25967 OF 2004 FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 31/03/2005. EXT.P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE TIME EXTENDING ORDER PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN W.P.(C) NO. 25967 OF 2004 DATED 16/8/2005. EXT.P5 - TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT EVIDENCING PAYMENT MADE BY THE PETITIONER DATED 31/8/2005. EXT.P6 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 17/02/06. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R2(a) - CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, PWD, BUILDINGS SECTION, MUNNAR DATED 17.12.2005 (TRUE COPY) EXT.R2(b) - TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. B5-4105/05 DATED 31/1/2006 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO CANCELL THE AUCTION. TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE rhs KURIAN JOSEPH, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.8580 OF 2006 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of September, 2008. J U D G M E N T Grievance is on Exhibit P6 order passed by the third respondent by which the petitioner was informed that the auction sale already conducted is cancelled by the second respondent. The main grievance of the petitioner is that the same is without proper notice to the petitioner and without considering the objections filed by the petitioner. 2. The stand taken by the second respondent is that confirmation was without taking into consideration the value of the building situated in the property. Whatever that may be, as on the date of cancellation, the petitioner was the auction purchaser and hence any order affecting his interest could not have been passed without notice to him. Hence, I quash Exhibit P6 with a direction to the second respondent to pass fresh orders in the matter after affording an opportunity for hearing to the petitioner. This shall be done W.P.(C) No.8580/06 2 within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. This writ petition is disposed of as above. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. smp W.P.(C) No.8580/06 3 KURIAN JOSEPH, J. W.P.(C) No. 8580 OF 2006 J U D G M E N T 01.09.2008