S K VIJAYALAKSHMI Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) W.P(C) No. 23364/2009 is filed by the petitioner therein challenging Ext. P5 order of the District Collector directing eviction of encroachers in respect of certain properties, part of which is in possession of the petitioner. W.P(C) No. 36996/2009 is filed by another person, who is the 3rd respondent in the other writ petition, seeking a direction to the respondents to enforce Ext. P5 order. One of the contentions raised by the petitioner in W.P(C) No. 23364/2009 is that before passing Ext. P5 order, the petitioner has not been given any notice or hearing. In the above circumstances, I directed the learned Government Pleader to obtain instructions as to whether before passing Ext. P5 order, the petitioner in W.P(C) No. 23364/2009 was afforded an opportunity of being heard.

(2.) The learned Government Pleader would submit that no notice or hearing to the petitioner is necessary because the District Collector has only directed the Tahsildar to take appropriate proceedings in accordance with law to evict the encroachers. But, from Ext. P5, I find that the District Collector has taken a view that there is encroachment and directed the Tahsildar to evict the encroachers, which include the petitioner also. I am of opinion that such a decision could have been taken only after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner also.

(3.) In the above circumstances, Ext. P5 in W.P(C) No. 23364/2009 is violative of the principles of natural justice and accordingly the same is quashed. The District Collector may either on his own decide the question as to whether there is any encroachment at all, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners in these two writ petitions and all the other alleged encroachers, who are sought to be evicted from the land in question. In the alternative, the District Collector may direct the Tahsildar to take appropriate action in the matter independently without entering any finding as to whether there is any encroachment, leaving it to be decided by the Tahsildar, who is the original authority under the Kerala Land Conservancy Act to pass orders in the first instance in accordance with law, in which case the District Collector may leave the hearing also to the Tahsildar. The District Collector shall take a final decision as to the further proceedings to be taken in the matter as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till the District Collector takes a decision, status quo as on today shall be maintained. It would be open to the petitioners to raise their contentions and adduce evidence in support of their case before the District Collector or the Tahsildar, if the matter is entrusted to the Tahsildar. The writ petitions are disposed of as above.