K ISWARA WARRIYAR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition concerns the preparation of record of rights under S.29 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, Act 1 of 1964, hereinafter referred to as the Act, in respect of the properties known as Attappadi Malavaram situate in Perinthalmanna Taluk comprising private forest lands belonging to the Mannarghat Moopil Sthanam. The said Attappadi Malavaram properties lie contiguously in the three villages in Perinthalmanna taluk, namely Agali, Sholayur and Pudur. The last of the Moopil Sthanees died in 1960. A suit for partition of the sthanam properties was instituted before his death and the petitioner was appointed as receiver in that suit. All the members of the Sthanee's family are parties to the suit.

(2.) The petitioner was served with notices by the 2nd respondent purporting to be in Form No. 7 under S.29 of the Act and R.16 of the Rules framed thereunder, intimating him that an enquiry would be held on 26-5-1965 and 19-6-1965 by the 2nd respondent for preparation of record of rights in respect of certain portions of the Attappadi Malavaram. Of the 125 notices served on the petitioner 63 notices relate to properties in Agali village while 62 in Sholayur Village. All these notices are of the same pattern. The petitioner has produced two of them, one relating to Agali and the other to Sholayur, and marked them as Exts. P-1 and P-2 respectively. Pursuant to these notices petitioner submitted objections evidenced by Exts. P-3 and P-4. Subsequently additional objections were filed by him and they are marked as Exts. P-5 and P-6. Thereafter draft record of rights was prepared by the 2nd respondent of the holdings of respondents 4 to 128. The petitioner filed his objections to the same evidenced by Exts. P-7 and P-8. These objections were overruled and final record of rights has been prepared after passing the necessary orders. The petitioner contends that the record of rights was not prepared in accordance with the provisions of S.29 and the rules thereunder, and therefore prays that the notices, the draft and the final record of rights be quashed by issuing the appropriate writ.

(3.) The main submission of the petitioner's counsel are the that the lands in respect of which the record of rights has been prepared are private forest lands, that these lands do not come within the purview of the Act, that there are no holdings as defined in the Act in the forest, and so no record could be prepared in respect of them, that the forest has not been surveyed and therefore it is not possible to identify the properties specified in the notices issued to him, that no enquiry as contemplated by the rules has been made, that he was not allowed to let in his evidence, that there is no record to show that a final order recording reasons for the entries in the record as contemplated in R.17(6) has been passed, and that the proceedings have been conducted in violation of the principles of natural justice.