IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH OCTOBER 2008 / 7TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 31412 of 2008(M) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ GIGI, S/O JOSEPH, THOTTIYIL HOUSE, VILAKA, CHINNAKANAL. BY ADV. SRI. S.V.BALAKRISHNA IYER(SR.) SRI.K.JAYAKUMAR SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, COMMISSIONER LAND REVENUE, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI. 4. THE SUB COLLECTOR, DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 5. THE SPECIAL OFFICER, REPRESENTING THE TASK FORCE FOR MUNNAR EVICATION, MUNNAR. 6. THE TAHSILDAR, UDUMBANCHOLA. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SUDHADEVI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/10/2008 ALONG WITH WPC.NO.31592 OF 2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) Nos.31412 & 31592 of 2008 -------------------------- Dated this the 29th October, 2008 J U D G M E N T Common issues arise for consideration in these writ petitions which have been heard together and therefore they are being disposed of by a common judgment. I am referring to the contentions in Writ Petition No.31412 of 2008 in the first instance. 2. Petitioner challenges Exhibit P15 notice issued by the 6th respondent Tahasildar, Udumbanchola requiring the petitioner to show cause why the land which is mentioned therein having an extent of 0.7910 hectares in Sy.No 37/21,23 of the Udumbanchola village should not be resumed. Petitioner has filed Exhibit P16 objections to Exhibit 15 notice inter alia contending that the petitioner has been in occupation of the land in question from the year 1983 onwards. By an application submitted on 26.4.1993, petitioner has applied for assignment of the said land on registry. Mahazar was prepared, a sketch W.P ( C) Nos.31412 & 31592 of 2008 2 was drawn and an order of assignment was issued on 12.7.1994. There were subsequent alienation by the petitioner asserting title to the property. Thereafter constructions were put up in the property. What is now proposed is cancellation of the patta already issued. This is without jurisdiction, it is contended. The writ petition has been filed by the petitioner on the apprehension that an order may be passed by the Tahasildar rejecting the objections and the same might be followed with emergent action for resuming possession and it might also involve co-ercive action against the building put up in the property. 3. Similar contentions are involved in W.PC No.31592 of 2008. Objections on the ground of lack of jurisdiction on the part of the Tahasildar could be taken up by the Tahasildar. If that be so, I have no reason to suspect that the Tahasildar would not address the objection. I find substance in the apprehension expressed by the petitioner that co-coercive action immediately on service of an order on the petitioner might lead to irreparable injury. In the result, the writ petitions are disposed of W.P ( C) Nos.31412 & 31592 of 2008 3 directing the 6th respondent to consider Exhibit P16 objections and hear the petitioner or their authorized representative and then pass a reasoned order pursuant to Exhibit P15. It is up to the Tahasildar to pass orders thereon. I make it clear that if such orders are adverse to the interests of the petitioner then enforcement of the same shall be kept in abeyance for a period of 15 days from the date of service of the same to enable the petitioner to avail alternate remedy available to him or take such appropriate action as is warranted. All contentions raised by the petitioner including those relating to the vires of the statutory provisions are left open. (V.GIRI,JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) Nos.31412 & 31592 of 2008 4 W.P ( C) Nos.31412 & 31592 of 2008 5