LAWS(KER)-2019-5-116

ZUBAIDA N Vs. THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE

Decided On May 20, 2019
Zubaida N Appellant
V/S
The Sub Divisional Magistrate Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking to quash Ext.P41 order passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Thalassery dated 05.07.2016, holding that the property situated in Re-survey No. 54/1A of Kannur-II Village is a public property and issued directions to the Kannur-II Village Officer to demarcate the said property in order to use the same as a public road.

(2.) Case projected by the petitioners is that, the said land ordered to be kept as a public way is belonging to the petitioners by Exts.P1 and P2 and the husband of the 1st petitioner obtained title in respect of 77 cents of land which takes in the said strip marked as field No.2 in Ext.P42 sketch. On the death of Subair, the said property devolved upon the petitioners, and therefore, the order passed by the 1st respondent, adversely affecting the right, title and interest of the petitioners, is bad and illegal. However, the 1st respondent by Ext.P41 had also ordered that petitioners can possess the properties in Re-survey Nos.55/4C and 54/2A which are located on either side of the land in Re-survey No.54/1 and thereupon, interdicted respondents 3 and 4 from trespassing into the said properties located in Re-survey Nos.55/4C and 52/2A. By the said order, 1st respondent has also directed the Town Surveyor to inspect and demarcate the land in Re-survey No.54/1A and handover the documents to the 2nd respondent, i.e., the Kannur Municipality and the Village Officer, Kannur-II.

(3.) The ground that is projected by the petitioners is that, Ext.P41 order passed by the 1 st respondent is without jurisdiction and violative of the principles of natural justice. It is also pointed out that, in Ext.P41, it is not specified by the 1st respondent the provision under which the said order is passed. It is also submitted that, Ext.P41 order is passed without providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. So also, none of the documents relied upon by the 1st respondent in order to pass Ext.P41 order was not made available to the petitioners. It is further submitted that, the findings rendered thereunder also are against the true facts and circumstances of the case, and therefore, the order suffers from the vice of arbitrariness and illegality. Petitioners have also produced various documents along with the writ petition in order to establish the title over the property in question.