BOBBY ZACHARIA Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is stated to be the holder of 1 Acre of land in Sy.No.20/1 of Chinnakkanal Village, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a declaration that the action of respondents 1 to 4 in re-possessing the said land comprised in Sy.No.20/1 covered by Ext.P6 sale deed bearing No.2386/2004 of Sub Registrar Officer, Rajakumari, dated 14.12.2004 is illegal and that the petitioner is entitled to possession of that property. The petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the 2nd respondent to return the property of the petitioner situated in Sy.No.20/1 of Chinnakkanal Village, covered by Exhibit P6 sale deed and for a declaration that resumption of land owned by the petitioner without notice to him is illegal and the petitioner is entitled to get possession of the property.

(2.) Going by the averments in the writ petition, suo motu proceedings has already been initiated against the petitioner under sub-section (1) of Section 87 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, for holding land above the the ceiling limit. By Ext.P3 judgment dated 26.02.2020 in W.P.(C).No.1942 of 2020, this Court directed the 5th respondent to complete the suo motu proceedings within 6 months and directed the Village Officer to accept tax. The 5th respondent, in compliance of the directions contained in Ext.P3 judgment, issued Ext.P4 notice to the petitioner directing him to appear for personal hearing on 25.8.2020. While so, the officials under the 2nd respondent, without serving any notice on the petitioner, encroached into his property and put up a board indicating that the property belongs to the Government. Ext.P5 is the news item, which appeared in Mathrubhumi daily dated 23.08.2020. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the aforesaid reliefs.

(3.) On 26.8.2020, when this writ petition came up for consideration, this Court has admitted the matter and the learned Government Pleader took notice for the respondents. This Court passed an interim order on 26.8.2020, which reads thus: