IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 30TH JULY 2009 / 8TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 17583 of 2007(R) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- PRAMOD JACOB, S/O.M.V.JACOB, RESIDING AT MANJALIL HOUSE, VAIKKOM ROAD, TRIPUNITHURA. BY ADVS. MR.V.V.SURENDRAN MR.P.A.HARISH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE. 3. THE TAHASILDAR, KOZHIKODE. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. DILIP MOHAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 17583 of 2007(R) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 - PHOTOCOPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 580/1996 EXT.P2 - PHOTOCOPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.581/1996 EXT.P3 - PHOTOCOPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.459/1996 EXT.P4 - PHOTOCOPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.458/1996 EXT.P5 - TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO. 25/1924 EXT.P6 - TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO. 1112/1941 EXT.P7 - TRUE COPY OF THE PROPERTY TAX RECEIPT. EXT.P8 - TRUE COPY OF THE PROPERTY TAX RECEIPT. EXT.P9 - TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 4.6.2007. //TRUE COPY // PA TO JUDGE rhs S. SIRI JAGAN, J ............................................... W.P(C) No.17583 of 2007 ................................................. Dated this the 30th day of July, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges Ext.P9 order under the Kerala Land Conservancy Act directing the petitioner to vacate the property mentioned therein on the ground that the same is government land. According to the petitioner, the property from which he is sought to be evicted belongs absolutely to him, which he could have convinced the 3rd respondent, had he been given an opportunity of being heard. No notice or hearing was not given to him at all, is the grievance of the petitioner. He submits that only Ext.P9 order has been issued to the petitioner directing him to vacate the property in question. At the time of admission I had passed the following interim order on 7.6.2007. “Notice and Interim Stay of further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P9. However, this shall not preclude the respondents from proceeding further after issuing a notice to the petitioner giving him an opportunity of being heard which shall include the opportunity to adduce evidence and passing a speaking order.” No counter affidavit has been filed. As such the contention W.P(C) No.17583 of 2007 -2- of the petitioner that, Ext.P9 was not proceeded by any notice or hearing stands uncontroverted. That being so, Ext.P9 is liable to be quashed. I do so. However this shall no preclude the respondents from proceeding further after issuing a notice to the petitioner and affording him an opportunity of being heard which shall include an opportunity to adduce evidence also, passing a speaking order dealing with all the contentions of the petitioner on merits. The writ petition is disposed of as above. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs