VELAYUDHAN Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is stated to be residing in House No. 207 in Ward No. XI of Chavakkad Municipality. His house comes within Re.Sy.No. 289/2 of Manathala Village. According to the petitioner, land measuring about 2 acres in Re.Sy.No. 289/2 in Manathala Village was taken on oral lease from one George. In the year 1973 petitioner constructed a new concrete house and compound wall around the two acres of land in his possession with the permission of the Chavakkad Panchayat According to the petitioner, he spent about Rs.10 lakhs for construction of the house. Petitioner also says that he is paying property tax to the Chavakkad Panchayat and later Chavakkad Municipality from 1977-1998. Petitioner stated that on 29.7.1999 fourth respondent came to the petitioner's residence and directed him to vacate from the building after clearing all constructions and hand over possession of the premises to the second respondent on or before 2.8.1999. Petitioner then approached the office of the Tahsildar. However, petitioner was informed that if the petitioner was not vacating the premises, he would be forcibly evicted. Petitioner has now approached this Court seeking a declaration that he has got absolute right over the property in question and also for a direction to the respondents not to evict the petitioner without following the provisions of law.

(2.) A verified statement has been filed by standing counsel for Guruvayur Devaswom on 6.8.1999. According to counsel, property is fully owned by the Guruvayur Devaswom and petitioner encroached upon the Devaswom land and constructed a terraced building. According to counsel, as per the decision of this Court in O.K. Rajan v. State, AIR 1994 Ker.179 , it is the paramount duty of the Managing Committee of the Guruvayur Devaswom to evict encroachers. Further, it was submitted that Devaswom is paying tax in respect of the property in question from 1991-99. Since petitioner did not vacate the premises, Devaswom addressed the District Collector for eviction of the petitioner under S.28(2) of the Guruvayur Devaswom Act, 1978. District Collector directed the Revenue Divisional Officer to take urgent steps to evict the petitioner. The Revenue Divisional Officer vide his letter No. A2.896799 dated 19.7.1999 directed the Tahsildar to evict the encroachment with police protection urgently.

(3.) I heard counsel for the petitioner Sri. P.N.K. Achan as well as Sri. K. Radhakrishnan. When the matter came up for hearing, I directed the standing counsel for the Guruvayur Devaswom to ascertain as to whether before taking action under S.28 of the Guruvayur Devaswom Act, encroacher was given any notice. Counsel for the Guruvayur Devaswom filed an additional statement dated 12.8.1999. It is evident from Annexures 7 and 8 that no notice was given to the petitioner before taking steps under S.28 of the Act Counsel for the 2nd respondent submitted that no notice is contemplated under S.28 of the Act, and therefore, encroacher is bound to vacate the premises, failing which the revenue authorities have got the power to evict him by force.