IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH JULY 2008 / 8TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 7037 of 2008(K) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ 1. P.V.CHERIYAN, S/O.VARGHESE, PULLINTHANATH HOUSE, PURAKKADY AMSOM, DESOM, S.BATHERY TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT. 2. P.V.KURIAKOSE, S/O.VARGHESE, DO. DO. BY ADV. SMT.CELINE JOSEPH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. KAMBIYAN, KORALAMBATH, KAKKAVAYAL POST, WAYANAD DISTRICT. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MANANTHAVADY. BY G.P. SMT.SUDHADEVI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P(C).No. 7037/08. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1. COPY OF THE DEED NO.4215/81 OF SRO, SULTHAN BATHERY. P2. COPY OF THE PURCHASE CERTIFICATE. P3. COPY OF THE PARTITION DEED. P4. COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.1242/98 OF SRO, SULTHAN BATHERY. P5. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.9.4.96 BY R2. P6. COPY OF THE PETITION DTD.18.4.00 BY P2.\ P7. COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT IN K.S.T.NO.930/87 BEFORE R2. P7A. COPY OF THE PETITION IN -DO- P8. COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT IN -DO- P8A. COPY OF THE DELAY PETITION. Sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No.7037 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 30th day of July, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioners are in possession of 2.25 acres of land in survey No.177/1A1A of the Purakkadi amsom, desom of Sulthan Bathery Taluk, as per document No.4215/81 of the Sub Registry Office. The 1st respondent filed an application under the Kerala Scheduled Tribes (Restriction on Transfer of Land and Restoration of Alienated Land) Act, 1975, seeking restoration of 2 acres of the said property from the petitioners on the ground that as per the provisions of the Act, he is entitled to such restoration. The said application was adjudicated by the Sub Collector, Mananthavadi, under the said Act, as K.S.T.No.930/87. In that application, Ext.P5 order was passed by the Sub Collector directing restoration of the land to the 1st respondent. The petitioners filed a petition for setting aside the ex parte order before the Sub Collector, which was also rejected by Ext.P9 order. 2. The petitioners are challenging those orders in this 2 writ petition primarily on the ground that before passing the original order, the petitioners were not served with notice and they were not heard in the matter. They would also submit that the name of the 2nd petitioner and the address of both petitioners are shown wrongly in the orders and they have not received any notices also as stated in the orders. 3. In view of the contention raised I directed the learned Government Pleader to produce the files relating to the same. The same was produced before me today. On a perusal of the same, I am satisfied that notice has not been properly served on the petitioners herein. Therefore, the impugned orders are clearly violative of the principles of natural justice. In the above circumstances, Exts.P5 and P9 orders are quashed. The 2nd respondent is directed to reconsider the matter and pass fresh orders after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners as well as the 1st respondent. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge 3