IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 7TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 16TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 27692 of 2010(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. P.K.ABBAS, AGED 60 YEARS, S/O. KONTHALAM, PAZHAYAVEETTIL HOUSE, KARIKODE, THODUPUZHA EAST P.O., IDUKKI DIST., PIN-685 585. 2. GOVINDAKUTTAN, AGED 72 YEARS, S/O. LATE C.GOVINDAN, EANTHUNGAL VEEDU, KARIKODE, THODUPUZHA EAST P.O., IDUKKI DIST., PIN-685 585. 3. K.P.JOSEPH, AGED 53, S/O.LATE PHILIPOSE, KANNANPALLIL HOUSE, KARIKODE, THODUPUZHA EAST PO., IDUKKI DIST., PIN-685 585. 4. KASIM, AGED 60 YEARS, S/O. LATE NAVOOR THAMPIKKANNU, KANNIPARAMBIL HOUSE, KARIKODE, THODUPUZHA EAST P.O., IDUKKI DIST., PIN-685 585. BY ADV. SRI.MAJNU KOMATH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (ROADS), ROADS SUB DIVISION, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DIST., PIN-685 585. 3. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (ROADS), ROADS SUB DIVISION, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DIST., PIN-685 585. 4. THODUPUZHA MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, THODUPUZHA P.O., IDUKKI DIST., PIN-685 585. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 27692 OF 2010 (J) ===================== Dated this the 7th day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T Although the petitioners admit that they are occupants of road puramboke and are carrying on petty trades, relying on Ext.P3 judgment in OP NO.5798/93, petitioners contend that their eviction can only be in compliance with the provisions of the Land Conservancy Act and only after issuing a notice under Section 11 of the said Act. It is contended that without complying with the said directions, Ext.P4 series of notices have been issued calling upon the petitioners to vacate from the places occupied by them within 7 days. It is these notices which are under challenge. 2. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 3. It is an undisputed fact that in Ext.P3 judgment rendered by this Court in OP NO.5798/93 filed by the petitioners, it has been directed that their eviction can only be after notice to them as per Section 11(3) of the Land Conservancy Act. This requirement does not appear to have been complied with, and if that be so, proceedings initiated by Ext.P4 series of notices WPC No. 27692/10 :2 : cannot be sustained. 4. Be that as it may, having regard to the directions in Ext.P3 judgment rendered as above, it is directed that Ext.P4 series of notices be treated as notices in compliance with the directions in Ext.P3 judgment. It will be open to the petitioners to file their objections to Ext.P4 series of notices to the 2nd respondent within 15 days from today. If the petitioners file replies as above, the 2nd respondent will hear them and pass final orders in the matter, which shall be done at any rate within 4 weeks of the petitioners filing their objections. In the meanwhile, it is directed that dispossession pursuant to Ext.P4 series of notices will be suspended. 5. Petitioners shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition before the 2nd respondent for compliance. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp