V. Vasudevan Menon and Others vs The Chairman, Taluk Land Board and Others

P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J—The petitioners herein are in ownership and possession of small extents of land in Survey Nos. 1036/3, 4 & 5 of Poonithura Village, Kanayannur Taluk, which was purchased by them as per Exts.P1 to P16/16(a) sale deeds for valuable sale consideration. The vendor of the above property obtained the same from another person by name Mary Gosmine, who was the declarant in the Ceiling Case No. L-4755/78. Steps have been taken to proceed against the said properties, which according to the petitioners are not correct or sustainable, as the petitioners have entitled to the benefit of Section 7E of the K.L.R Act, as amended. It is also stated that the petitioners have already approached the 1st respondent by filing Ext.P18 (preferred by them jointly). Because of the coercive steps, the petitioners approached this Court earlier by filing W.P.(C) No. 24399/2011, which was disposed of as Ext.P19 judgment dated 20.09.2011, whereby the 1st respondent was directed to consider the aforesaid application (produced as Ext.P18) with notice to the petitioners, at the earliest and at any rate within three months from the date of production of a copy of the judgment. The case of the petitioners is that the proceedings are still to be finalized and the non-compliance of the direction given by this Court virtually amounts to contempt of court as well.

Without complying with the direction, the revenue authorities have issued Ext.P20 series notices to the petitioners on 29.01.2015 requiring to vacate the premises, lest coercive steps should be pursued to evict the petitioners. This made the petitioners to approach this Court again by filing this writ petition.

Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.

Going by the pleadings and proceedings, it is seen that the course pursued by the revenue authorities by issuing Ext.P20 series notices, before finalizing the applications preferred by the petitioners under Section 7E of the Act, as referred to in Ext.P19 and before complying with the direction given by the Court as per the said judgment, is liable to be deprecated. It is true that coercive steps were not intercepted when Ext.P19 judgment was passed. It presupposed the direction given by this Court to be complied without any delay and within the prescribed time. Nearly three and a half years are already over, after passing Ext.P19 judgment. The learned counsel for the petitioners asserts that no copy of the order has been served/sent to the petitioners, pursuant to Ext.P19. If this is true, no further proceedings can be taken pursuant to Ext.P20 series notices, before finalizing the proceedings as ordered by Ext.P19 judgment.

It is true that no Contempt of Court proceedings will lie at this distance of time, with regard to non-compliance of Ext.P19, as the stipulated time under Sec. 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act is over, and in view of the law declared by a Full Bench of this Court in P. Damodaran Vs. Cherkalam Abdulla and Others, AIR 2007 Ker 153 : (2007) 2 ILR (Ker) 6 : (2007) 2 KLJ 1 . It is also brought to the notice of this Court that under similar circumstances, favorable orders like Ext.P16 order has been passed by the 1st respondent in the case of other similarly situated persons.

This being the position, the 1st respondent is directed to finalize the proceedings as already ordered by this Court vide Ext.P19, passing appropriate orders on Ext. P18 within ''one month'' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and the outcome shall be let known to the Registrar General of this Court forthwith. All further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P20 series shall stand stayed till such time.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

The petitioners shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the 1st respondent for further steps.