IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 25TH JUNE 2009 / 4TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 17767 of 2009(M) --------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. K.RAJAMMA AMMA, W/O. LATE PADAMANABHA PILLAI, THUNDUVILAKATHU VEEDU, NOW AT "SREE PADMAM", JNARDHANAPURAM, ALTHARAMOODU, VARKALA. 2. RAJENDRA BABU.P., S/O. LATE PADMANABHA PILLAI, PROPRIETOR, SREE PADMAM HOTEL, RESIDING AT "SREE PADMAM" JANARADHANAPURAM, ALTHARAMOODU, VARKALA. BY ADV. MR.M.SREEKUMAR. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TRIVANDRUM. 3. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, LAND CONSERVANCY, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER P.N. SANTHOSH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/06/2009, ALONG WITH W.P.(C). NO. 17766/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).17767 &17766/2009 -------------------- Dated this the 25th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT Common issues arise for consideration in these writ petitions. Therefore, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment. I will refer to the facts in W.P.(C).17766/2009 and the disposal of the same will govern the other writ petition also. 2. Petitioner claims to be in possession of shop room bearing No.VMC1/307 situated in half cents of property in Varkala Village. According to him, the property originally belonged to one Krishnaswami Rayer and the property was mortgaged in favour of one Janaki Bhai. It was lying vacant for a short spell during the year 1960. Petitioner does not claim any title to the property in this writ petition. According to the petitioner, his father took possession of the same and was conducting a shop there. 3. While so Ext.P1 notice has been issued by the 3rd respondent under the Land Conservancy Act. It seems that the proceedings under the Act have been taken, on the premise that the property is eligible to be treated as W.P.(C).17767 & 17766/09 2 Devaswom puramboke. The main grievance raised by the petitioner is that the 3rd respondent, Special Tahsildar, has already filed a counter affidavit before the Lok Ayukta, as evidenced by Ext.P2, in a complaint pending before the Lok Ayukta as complaint No.2250/06, affirming that the property covered by Ext.P1 along with several other properties, is eligible to be treated as puramboke and therefore liable to be evicted. According to the petitioner, there is a predetermined view entertained by the 3rd respondent and even if the proceedings are continued, it may be done by an Officer other than the 3rd respondent 4. Reference is also made to Ext.P4, a report sent by the District Collector to the Commissioner, covering certain properties originally held by R.Krishna Rayer, Sreenivasa Rayer, Reddy Rayer, Ramachandra Rayer, and Natha Reddiyar, who later migrated to Kumbakonam. The said property is covered by pokkuvaravu file No.513/96 and Thandaper Register No.17265. In the report submitted by the 2nd respondent to the Commissioner of Land Revenue, it is stated that the property is liable to be treated as an abandoned property. W.P.(C).17767 & 17766/09 3 According to the petitioner, there is a suit pending before the Civil Court. I do not find any reason to interdict the continuation of proceedings initiated under the Act. But if the 3rd respondent has taken a stand in relation to the same, then it is appropriate that the proceedings are continued by the RDO who obviously, would have jurisdiction to take further proceedings in this regard. Accordingly, Ext.P1 notice shall be transmitted to the jurisdictional RDO, who shall after hearing the affected persons, proceed to take further action pursuant to Ext.P1 in accordance with law. The files relating to Ext.P1 shall be transmitted to the jurisdictional RDO within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Petitioner shall produce the judgment before the concerned RDO as also the 3rd respondent within ten days from today, along with a copy of the writ petition and papers relating to the Civil Suit. Writ petitions are disposed of as above. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs