W.P. (C) No.14716 of 2011 (L)

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.HARILAL** **FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/9TH MAGHA, 1937** ## **WP(C).No. 14716 of 2011 (L)** **----------------------------** ## **PETITIONER(S): --------------------------** **SMT.REMA, W/O.SASI, PUTHETTUTHAZHATHU HOUSE, POTHAMEDU, PALLIVASSAL, CHITHIRAPURAM, MUNNAR. P.O., NOW RESIDING AT PUTHETTUTHAZATHU HOUSE, ELLAKKAL. P.O., CHITHIRAPURAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN-685 565.** **BY ADVS.SRI.S.VINOD BHAT, SRI.M.K.THANKAPPAN, SRI.LEGITH T.KOTTAKKAL.** ## **RESPONDENT(S):** **----------------------------** ## **1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI-685 602.** ## **2. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,** **DEVIKULAM-685 613.** ## **3. TAHSILDAR, DEVIKULAM-685 613.** **4. VILLAGE OFFICER, VILLAGE OFFICE, PALLIVASAL-685 565.** **BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.V.K. RAFEEQUE.** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **rs.** ## **WP(C).No. 14716 of 2011 (L)** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-** - **EXT.P1 COPY OF THE PATTA BEARING NO.13826 OF PALLIVASAL VILLAGE IN FAVOUR OF PETITIONER.** - **EXT.P2 COPY OF THE CHALLAN RECEIPT DATED 07/01/1994 FOR RS.2366/-. EXT.P2A COPY OF THE CALCULATION SHEET. EXT.P3 COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 15/12/1993 ISSUED BY SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, DEVIKULAM.** - **EXT.P4 COPY OF THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 31/12/1993 BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXT.P5 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 16/12/1993 ISSUED BY SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, (CARDAMOM SETTLEMENT), DEVIKULAM.** - **EXT.P6 COPY OF THE SKETCH. EXT.P7 COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.B5-4353/97 DATED 12/97 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.** - **EXT.P8 COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 29/12/1997.** **EXT.P9 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29/11/2001 OF REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, DEVIKULAM. EXT.P10 COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.B5/4353/97 DATED 03/09/1999 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P10A COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.B5/4353/97 DATED 16/10/1999 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P10B COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.B5/4353/97 DATED 29/12/1999 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P10C COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.B5/4353/97 DATED NIL ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P10D COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.B5/4353/97 DATED 22/01/2000 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT.** **....2/-** **WP(C).No. 14716 of 2011 (L)** ## **EXT.P10E COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.B5/4353/97 DATED NIL ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT.** **EXT.P11 COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.B5/4353/97 DATED 01/01/2001 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT.** **EXT.P12 COPY OF THE VAKKALATH EXECUTED ON 24/01/2001.** **EXT.P13 COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 24/07/2010.** **EXT.P14 COPY OF THE ARGUMENT NOTE SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 06/11/2010.** **EXT.P15 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.C2-32689/2010 DATED 21/02/2011 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.** ## **RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:NIL.** ## **//TRUE COPY//** ## **P.S. TO JUDGE** **rs.** ## K.HARILAL, J. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ## W.P. (C) No.14716 of 2011 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Dated this the 29[th] day of January, 2016 JUDGMENT ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ The petitioner was granted with Ext.P1 Patta by the 3[rd] respondent and thereafter she has been in possession and enjoyment of the land covered by the said Patta and the same is evidenced by Exts.P2 and P2(a). After four years, the 3[rd] respondent issued Ext.P7 notice to the petitioner requiring her to show cause as to why Ext.P1 Patta should not be cancelled and as per Ext.P8 the petitioner showed cause for not cancelling the Patta. According to the petitioner, thereafter there was no action from the part of the 2[nd] respondent and the petitioner bona fide believed that Ext.P7 proceedings were dropped. But, unfortunately, after thirteen years, the petitioner came to know from the village office that Ext.P1 Patta was cancelled in the year 2001. It was also understood that the order cancelling Ext.P1 patta was **WP(C).14716/11 :2:** passed by Ext.P9 without hearing the petitioner or properly serving notice as alleged by the 3[rd] respondent. Hence the petitioner had challenged Ext.P9 before the 1[st] respondent in appeal and the appeal was filed on 24.7.2010. During the pendency of Ext.P13 appeal before the 1[st] respondent, the Munnar Special Tribunal Act 2010 came into force transferring the jurisdiction from the 1[st] respondent and vesting the same with the Tribunal constituted under the Act. Thus, the 1[st] respondent has no jurisdiction to decide Ext.P13 appeal. But, without considering the lack of jurisdiction, the 1[st] respondent considered the appeal and dismissed the same by confirming the findings in Ext.P9 order. The legality and propriety of the 1[st] respondent's jurisdiction to hear and pass orders on the appeal are under challenge in this writ petition. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner advanced arguments contending that the impugned **WP(C).14716/11 :3:** order was passed on 21.2.2011 and the appeal was filed on 24.7.2010. During the pendency of the appeal, the Munnar Special Tribunal Act 2010 came into force on 7.8.2010. But, without considering the lack of jurisdiction after 7.8.2010, the 1[st] respondent considered the appeal and passed Ext.P15 order. In short, the argument is that the 1[st] respondent exercised jurisdiction, which is not vested in him. To fortify his argument, the learned counsel cited the decision rendered by the Division Bench of this Court reported in M/s.Kannan Devan Hills Plantations Co. (P) Ltd. v. State of Kerala [2010 (4) KLT 24]. 4. Going by Ext.P13 appeal, it is seen that the appeal was filed on 24.7.2010 and Ext.P15 order under challenge in this writ petition was passed on 21.2.2011. Admittedly, the Munnar Special Tribunal Act, 2010 has come into force on 7.8.2010. Going by Section 2(d) of the Munnar Special Tribunal Act, 2010, “Dispute” means all disputes with respect to ownership, possession, use or any rights whatsoever over or concerning the land **WP(C).14716/11 :4:** in Munnar area as well as all constructions and other uses of the land in such area which are pending before any authority or courts. Section 2(g) of the said Act defines the extent of 'Munnar area', which includes Pallivasal where the property involved in Ext.P15 order is situated. Section 4 of the Munnar Special Trinunal Act, 2010, deals with transfer of disputes to the Tribunal, which reads that, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force or order, decree or judgment, all disputes in respect of Munnar area pending before any Court or any other authority except the High Court and the Supreme Court shall stand transferred to the Tribunal immediately on the constitution of the Tribunal under this Act. 5. On a combined reading of all the relevant dates referred above, it is seen that, indisputably, the dispute was pending before the 1[st] respondent when the Act has come into force. Hence the 1[st] respondent ought to have transferred the case to the Munnar **WP(C).14716/11 :5:** Special Tribunal consequent on the operation of law under Section 4 of the Munnar Special Tribunal Act, 2010. But, the 1[st] respondent went wrong by proceeding with the appeal and exercised jurisdiction which was not vested in him on the date of dismissal of Ext.P13 appeal. 6. Consequently, Ext.P15 order will stand set aside and the matter will stand remitted back to the Munnar Special Tribunal. The 1[st] respondent is directed to transmit the entire files to the Munnar Special Tribunal forthwith. The Munnar Special Tribunal is directed to consider Ext.P13 appeal and pass orders, at the earliest. This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- K. HARILAL, JUDGE okb.