MUNNAR WOODS Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in this writ petition is a partnership firm. They are challenging Ext. P1 order dated 18/05/2007 of the 4th respondent District Collector, Idukki, by which 2.84 acres of property jointly owned by the partners of the petitioner firm in Sy.Nos.84/1-1 and 84/1-2 in Pallivasal Village in Devikulam Taluk, have been ordered to be resumed by the Government for violation of R.14 of the Rules for Lease of Government Lands for Cardamom Cultivation, 1961 Ext. P1 was passed pursuant to Ext. P10 show cause notice dated 09/01/2007, in which, it was alleged that the running of a resort by the petitioner in the property by converting the land reserved for cultivation of cardamom is in violation of R.36 and 37 of the 1936 Rules for grant of Patta for cultivation of cardamom, condition No. 4 of the said rules, R.7, 11 and 24 of the Rules for Lease of Government Lands for Cardamom Cultivation, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 1961 Rules), and condition Nos. 7, 11, 14, 16 and 17 of the order under which the lease has been granted.

(2.) According to the petitioners, on receipt of Ext. P10 show cause notice, directing the petitioner to show cause why the patta / lease granted in respect of the land reserved for cardamom cultivation, should not be cancelled and the land resumed by the Government, the petitioner filed Ext. P11 reply explaining that the land belongs to the partners of the firm absolutely, they having brought the same by sale deed No. 456/2003, dated 27/01/2003 of Kothamangalam Sub Registrar's Office, which is maintained as a cardamom plantation, in which a resort is constructed in the most eco friendly manner, without cutting any trees or altering the nature of the land. They also claimed to have produced documents to prove their contentions. Thereafter, the petitioner was served with Ext. P12 notice dated 08/05/2007 directing the petitioner to appear for a hearing before the Collector at 2.30 p.m. on 16/05/2007, with all documents of title in respect of the property. According to the petitioner, on that day, the petitioner along with his advocate was present in the office of the Collector from 1 p.m. onwards with documents and Ext. P13 note explaining their contentions. However, the Collector was not present in his office. They waited in the office till 5 p.m. and returned, since the Collector did not come till the closure of the office hours. Despite the same, Ext. P1 order was passed stating that the petitioner did not appear for the hearing despite receipt of notice and directing resumption of the land for violation of the 1961 Rules. Pursuant to Ext. P1, the resort constructed spending crores of rupees was razed to the ground on 21/05/2007 without even considering the plea of the petitioner for time to remove the valuables from the resort. It is under the above circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs:

(3.) In support of his claim for title the petitioner traces his title thus: