IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID FRIDAY, THE 30TH MAY 2008 / 9TH JYAISHTA 1930 CRP.No. 116 of 1995() --------------------- TLB.874/1973 of TALUK LAND BOARD, KOTTAYAM .................... REVN. PETITIONER: ------------------ KURIAN ISSAC, OOPPOOTTIL, KOTTAYAM BY ADV. SRI.V.G.ARUN SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TRIVANDRUM 2. THE TALUK LAND BOARD, KOTTAYAM 3. THE TAHSILDAR, KOTTAYAM 4. THE TAHSILDAR, KUTTANAD BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER THOMAS JOHN AMBOOKKAN THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER IN C.M.P NO. 167 OF 1995 IN C.R.P. NO. 116 OF 1995 DISMISSED 30.5.2008 SD/- HARUN -UL-RASHID, JUDGE HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ------------------------------------------ C.R.P No. 116 of 1995 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of May 2008 ORDER The declarant is the revision petitioner . By the impugned proceedings dated 4.1.1995 the Taluk Land Board Kottayam directed the declarant to surrender16.30.906 acres as excess land . Now the dispute is in respect of exclusion of 8.65 acres in Survey No 24/2 . The authorised officer reported that the declarant is in possession of the disputed area of 8.65 acres in Survey No. 242/2 of Kavalam Village and further reported that the property was sold by the declarant and his family in the years 1973 and 1975. The authorised officer has filed his report on 19.10.1992.The declarant and his family have also serious grievance about the identification of the property in Survey No. 242/2. It is their case that the declarant and his family had other lands comprised in the same Survey numbers other than the 8.65 acres and therefore requested for verification of the property in the said survey number. The declarant filed objection dated 20.1.1993 to the report of the authorised officer. On the basis of the objection filed by the declarant regarding the verification of the property, the authorised officer again filed a report on 14.7.1994. It is submitted that the declarant was never informed about submission of the report dated 14.7.1994 .Though an application was submitted for issuing copy of the said report the Taluk Land Board failed to give a copy C.R.P No. 116/1995 -2- of the report and therefore it is submitted that the declarant is unable to substantiate the case before the Taluk Land Board Kottayam. It is also submitted that the Copy application was dismissed on 19.10.1994 based on the authorised office's report. The Taluk Land Board decided the case against the declarant. It is submitted by the revision petitioner/declarant if sufficient opportunity is given to substantiate his contentions the impugned proceedings ought not have been passed by the Taluk Land Board. Therefore the impugned proceedings is illegal and was passed in gross violation of natural justice 2. On a consideration of the entire facts and circumstances this Court is of the view that the Taluk Land Board ought to have given opportunity to the declarant to agitate and substantiate his contentions. Therefore this Court direct the Taluk Land Board to consider the objections of the declarant There is a direction to the Taluk Land Board to furnish a copy of the second report of the authorised officer to the declarant and to decide the case afresh after giving an opportunity to raise all contentions including the claim under Section 7E of the Land Reforms Act 3. In the result the Order under revision is set aside. The C.R.P. Is disposed of as above. There will be no order as to costs HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE es