IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 23RD AUGUST 2011 / 1ST BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 22891 of 2011(J) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- ROSAMMA MATHEW @ ROSILI KARTHA, AGED 56 YEARS, W/O.LATE P.NARAYANA KARTHA, H.NO.5/46, THANDADIYIL HOUSE, SECOND MILE, PALLIVASAL.P.O., VIA MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.A.X.VARGHESE SRI.A.V.JOJO RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, DEVIKULAM – 685 606. 3. THE ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, DEVIKULAM – 685 606. 4. THE SECRETARY, PALLIVASAL GRAMA PANCHAYATH, PALLIVASAL.P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT- 685 723. BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss W.P.(C) NO.22891/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 9.11.1993 IN OP. 14429/1993 OF THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT. P2:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 13.8.1996 IN OP.10651/1996 OF THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT. P3:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 9.2.2000 IN OP. 4237/2000 OF THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT. P4:- COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DTD. 13.2.2004 IN WRIT APPEAL NO.1300/2001 AND OP.14000/2002 OF THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT. P5:- COPY OF THE ORDER IN APPEAL 251/06 DT. 3.8.2006. P6:- COPY OF THE INFORMATION DTD. 2.4.2008. P7:- COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 12.8.2011 UNDER SECTION 12 OF THE LAND CONSERVANCY ACT. 1957. P8:- COPY OF THE REPLY DTD. 17.8.2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL:- TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss ANTONY DOMINIC, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No. 22891 of 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of August, 2011. JUDGMENT The prayer sought in the writ petition is to quash Exhibit P7 notice and to direct the respondents to keep in abeyance further proceedings under the Kerala Land Conservancy Act and Rules. Exhibit P7 is the notice in question which has been issued to the petitioner, in pursuance under the provisions of Kerala Land Conservancy Act. It is seen that the petitioner approached this Court on various occasions in relation to 1 acre 20 cents of land which the petitioner claims possession. In Exhibit P4 judgment of this Court and Writ Appeal No.1300/2001 and O.P No. 14000/2002 the Division Bench of this Court held as follows: “11. In the above circumstances, the writ appeal deserves to be allowed and the impugned judgment is liable to be set aside. We are surprised that neither the Pallivasal Panchayat nor the Revenue Authorities have taken effective steps to protect the land. According to the Panchayat, it s vested in the Panchayat. According to the first respondent it belongs to the Government. We can only hope that at least at this late hour the Panchayat and Revenue W.P(C) No. 22891 of 2011 2 Authorities will wake up and take necessary action to protect the land. 12. For the reasons stated above the writ appeal No.1300/2001 is allowed and the judgment dated 9.2.2000 in O.P.No.4237/2000 is set aside. O.P.No.14000/2002 is dismissed with cost of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand only) to be paid to the Kerala legal Services Authority within a month”. 2. In the writ appeal the petitioner herein was the first respondent. According to the learned Government Pleader it is in pursuance to the above, impugned proceedings have been initiated. Since Exhibit P4 has attained finality, there is no illegality in Exhibit P7 this Court will not be justified in coming to the rescue of the petition. Writ petition fails and is dismissed sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE rkc //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE