IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID FRIDAY, THE 19TH DECEMBER 2008 / 28TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 CRP.No. 87 of 2006() ------------------------------ CC.367/1973 of TALUK LAND BOARD, OTTAPALAM .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): ( IST DECLARANT) ------------------------------- KAMALAKSHY, W/O. LATE CHARAKKUMALIL PADMANABHAN, CHERUKODE, VALLAPUZHA, OTTAPPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DIST. BY ADV. SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN SRI.PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH SRI.K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT -------------------------- 1. TALUK LAND BOARD, OTTAPPALAM, REPRSENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 2. TAHSILDAR, OTTAPALAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SHYSON P.MANGUZHA THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: HARUN-UL-RASHID,J. ------------------------- C.R.P No.87 of 2006 -------------------------- Dated this the 19th December, 2008 O R D E R The order under challenge is dated 30.11.2005 of the Taluk Land Board, Otttappalam. The declarant's wife is the revision petitioner. As per the proceedings dated 28.7.1981, the declarant was directed to surrender an extent of 1.10 acres of land as excess land. On 22.9.2005, the revision petitioner submitted an application stating that the property ordered to be surrendered from Sy.No.175/10 is not in the possession of the declarant or his legal heirs and therefore requested the Taluk Land Board to permit her to opt the property from Sy No.35/1 of Poovakkode Desom. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner that subsequently the case was posted for hearing on 24.9.2005, 23.11.2005, 21.12.2005, 3.1.2006, 4.1.2006 and finally on 5.1.2006. There was no sitting on 23.11.2005 and the case was adjourned to 21.12.2005. C.R.P No.87 of 2006 2 On 21.12.2005 as well the petitioner's counsel appeared before the Board. On that day also, a notice was published intimating that the cases posted on that date stands adjourned to 3.1.2006, 4.1.2006 and 5.1.2006. The petitioner's counsel honestly believed that the case that the above ceiling case also has been adjourned to the said dates. It is submitted that he appeared on the said dates as well. However, the case was not seen posted. On enquiry in the Board office the counsel came to understand that the Taluk Land Board considered the case on 23.11.2005 itself and was adjourned to another date namely 30.11.2005. Order was seen passed on 30.11.2005 in the absence of the petitioner or his counsel though it is submitted that they were very vigilant in prosecuting the matter. The Taluk Land Board also did not accept the option submitted by the petitioner and stick to the earlier stand. 2. On going through the order under challenge, I find that the contention of the petitioner has some force. Therefore, the Taluk Land Board shall reconsider the C.R.P No.87 of 2006 3 matter on merits and pass fresh orders. In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed. The case is remanded to the court below for fresh consideration of the matter on merits. The matter shall be decided within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. No order as to costs. ( HARUN-UL-RASHID,JUDGE) ma C.R.P No.87 of 2006 4 C.R.P No.87 of 2006 5