IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID TUESDAY, THE 12TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 23RD MAGHA 1929 CRP.No. 399 of 2004() --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 20/01/2004 IN TLB.1651/1973/HOS of TALUK LAND BOARD, HOSDRUG .................... REVN. PETITIONERS: LEGAL HEIRS OF THE DECLARENT ---------------------------------------------- 1. K.T.VASUDEVAN S/O. KUNHAMBU NAIR, RESIDING AT C.P.HOUSE, CHEEMANI VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 2. K.T.DEVAKI, D/O..KUNHAMBU NAIR, KOROM VILLAGE, TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT BY ADVS. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SMT.T.RESMI DAMODARAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE TALUK LAND BOARD, HOSDURG, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, HOSDURG. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. K.T.KALLYANI AMMA D/O. C.P.KUNHAMBU, CHEEMENI, PADINHARAKKARA, CHEEMENI VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT 5. K.T.KRISHNAN, S/O. C.P.KUNHAMBU NAIR, ELAMBACHI, SOUTH TRIKARIPUR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT 6. K.T.JANAKI AMMA, D/O. C.P.KUNHAMBU NAIR, CHEEMENI, PADINHARAKKARA, CHEEMENI VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARGOD DISTRICT 7. K.T.MADHAVAN S/O.KUNHAMBU NAIR, TELEPHONE EXCHANGE, CHEEMENI, HOSDRUG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 8. K.T.KARTHYANI, D/O. C.P.KUNHAMBU NAIR, CHEEMENI, KIZHAKKEKKARA, HOSDRUG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT 9. K.T.SUKUMARAN S/O. C.P.KUNHAMBU NAIR, REGIONAL EMPLOYMENT OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. LATHA THANKAPPAN -R1 TO R3 THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER IN I.A. NO. 1218 OF 2004 IN C.R.P. NO. 399 OF 2004. DISMISSED 12.2.2008 Sd/-(HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE) HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ---------------------------------------- C.R.P.NO. 399 OF 2004 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of February, 2008 O R D E R This revision petition is filed by the legal heirs of the declarant C.P. Kumhambu Nair against the proceedings of the Taluk Land Board, Hosdurg dated 20.1.2004. 2. The Taluk Land Board by proceedings dated 30.6.1976 had ordered to take possession of an extent of 4.87 acres of land in various survey numbers of Cheemeni village as excess land. In the revised proceedings dated 11.8.1977, the Taluk Land Board modified the earlier order and held that the declarant is not liable to surrender any land. Subsequently, the Taluk Land Board reopened the case under Section 85 (9A) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) after issuing notice to the legal heirs of the declarant. 3. It is submitted by the revision petitioners that the Taluk Land Board without hearing the affected parties straightaway reviewed the order and proceeded to consider the matter afresh. According to the C.R.P. NO.399/2004 2 revision petitioners, the Taluk Land Board gets jurisdiction to review and reopen a case only after hearing the affected parties. They have a further contention that there was absolutely no material before the Taluk Land Board to invoke the provisions of Section 85(9A) of the Act. In response to the notice received by the legal heirs, they filed detailed objections raising several legal and factual contentions. Learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioners submitted that the objections were not verified by obtaining a report from the authorised officer and that without verification, the matter was taken up and the impugned order was passed. It is also submitted that the revision petitioners were not given an opportunity to adduce evidence in support of their objections. 4. I have gone through the order passed by the Taluk Land Board. In the order, the Taluk Land Board has not stated whether the objections filed by the revision petitioners were verified by the authorised officer. No report was either called for or submitted by the authorised officer. I have also noted the fact that the order was passed without affording an opportunity to the parties to adduce evidence. In the circumstances, it is only just and proper in the interest of justice that an opportunity is given to the revision petitioners to raise their contentions and to adduce evidence, if any, in support of their contentions. C.R.P. NO.399/2004 3 In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed. The impugned order is set aside and the Taluk Land Board is directed to reconsider the matter afresh after issuing notice to the parties under Section 85(9A) of the Act. The Taluk Land Board shall give an opportunity to the revision petitioners to adduce evidence, if any, and shall obtain a detailed report from the authorised officer on the objections filed by the revision petitioners. The Taluk Land Board shall dispose of the matter within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There will be no order as to costs. (HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE) sp/ C.R.P. NO.399/2004 4 HAURN-UL-RASHID, J. L.A.A. .NO 8TH FEBRUARY, 2008