VARGHESE ULAHANNAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANTS are the writ petitioners. They approached the learned Single Judge with the writ petition seeking the following prayers:

(2.) BRIEFLY put, the case of the appellants is as follows: The 6th respondent filed Ext.P3 complaint before the 2nd respondent stating herself as the only legal heir of her deceased father Kochola Kuttappen in whose favour patta for 2 acres of land (Plot No.101) was issued as for proceedings in L.A.90/84 in Maniyanthadam Harijan settlement Colony Manjaloor village and the same is now under encroachment and she may be granted patta in her name after evicting encroaches. She obtained Ext.P5 order in W.P.(C).16691/2011 dated 22.06.2011 which directed the 2nd respondent District Collector to dispose of Ext. P3 complaint. The 2nd respondent called for Ext.P6 report from 4th respondent Tahasildar which states that only an offer of assignment of Plot No.101 was issued in favour of Kochola Kuttappan and he died before issuing Patta. Ext.P6 further reported that all the petitioners are residing in the said property and all of them have ration cards and all the residential houses have electrical connections from the K.S.E.B. and it is practically difficult to evict the petitioners. On coming to know about Ext.P3 complaint the petitioners sent by registered post Ext.P7 petition stating their objection and also praying for disposal of Ext.P3 along with Ext.P7. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent conducted an enquiry in which he declined to receive the objections and documents handed over by the petitioners on hearing that the petitioners have no tax receipt/title deed/patta in respect the property. Aggrieved by it, the petitioners sent by registered post Ext.P9 petition to the 2nd respondent stating the fact and the objections to Ext.P3 complaint. Both Ext.P7 and P9 were received by the 2nd respondent much before Ext.P13 order which is under challenge in the above writ petition. The petitioners are residing in the property for the last 40 or more years and the same was encroached by their forefathers when these lands were forest lands before transfer to revenue department for assignment to Harijans. The 2nd respondent disposed of Ext.P3 complaint by directing the 4th respondent to evict the petitioners from the land and to issue patta to the 6th respondent. None of the objections of the petitioners were considered. Copies of documents relied on for passing Ext.P13 order is not given to petitioners. 6th respondent has raised claim in respect of the property for the first time after 27 years of offer of assignment and no satisfactory reasons are given for the delay. Offer of assignment/order of assignment not followed by issue of patta does not create valid title over the property. No patta having been issued in respect of the property in favour of Kochola Kuttappan. 6th respondent has no right or title over the property even if she is his legal heir. The 6th respondent is not a legal heir and there is no discussion or evaluation of evidence in Ext.P13 order and the same is liable to be set aside on various grounds given in the writ petition. The petitioners or their family members do not own any other land and if evicted they have no place to go. They are labourers doing coolie work for daily wages. Their children are studying in various classes in the near by schools. In the above circumstances the above writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P13 order and for interim orders till the disposal of the writ petition.

(3.) BEING aggrieved, the appellants are before us.