R N MURUGESAN Vs. V PRABHAKARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INVOKING the power of this Court under Sec. 482 of the code of Criminal Procedure, petitioners who are members 2 and 3 of A party in the proceedings in M. C. No. 3 of 1991, initiated under Sec. 145 of the Code of criminal Procedure and pending on the file of the Sub Divisional Magistrate and revenue Divisional Officer, Gudalur, have filed this petition to call for the records in the above proceedings and quash the same. Interim stay of the above proceedings was granted on 17. 7. 1991 in Crl. M. P. No. 3749 of 1991. For vacating the interim stay granted by this Court Crl. M. P. Nos. 5141 and 5142 of 1991 have been filed. As per the Order of the Hon' 'ble The Acting Chief justice, since all the petitions above referred are posted before me by consent of parties, I have proposed to dispose them by rendering a common order after hearing the full arguments.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case which led to the filing of crl. O. P. No. 6156 of 1991 are stated as follows: An extent of 40. 14 acres of land comprised in S. No. 251/a situated in Padanthorai Village , Gudalur Taluk in Nilgiris district was owned by Jenmam of Nilambur Kovilagam. It was sub divided into 251/a2 (to the extent of 38. 80 acres)'251/a2 and 251/a3 to an extent of 1. 34 acres subsequently. Again S. No. 251/a1 an extent of 38. 80 acres has been assigned new S. Nos. 477/4'477/9 and 477/1 part. In 1950, all the properties above referred were leased out to one M. Bapu by Nilambur Kovilagam on an oral lease. However in March, 1951, he has entrusted the property to the first petitioner herein and the Jenmam of Nilambur Kovilagam recognised the 1st petitioner as their tenant. The second petitioner is his son. Jenmam collected the lease amount from the first petitioner since 1951 to 1969 and have issued receipts for the payment of Patta. Thereafter, no rent was paid in view of the tamil Nadu Gudalur Jenmam Estates Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari Act (24 of 1969) came into force and in and by virtue of which, the above lands are deemed to be vested with the State Government. In accordance with the said Act 24 of 1969, particularly Sec. 10 of the same, when a person has been cultivating such land for a continuous period of three agricultural years prior to June, 1969, he shall be entitled to the Ryotwari patta. But however, a person by name eranhikkal Veerankutty appears to have made claims during 1977 or so but after sometime, he withdrew his claim. But even so, in a suo motu enquiry conducted by the Assistant Settlement Officer (Enquiry), Gudalur, under the said Act, he has declared the said land as Forest Poramboke but he has not given any notice to the first petitioner or any one except the Jenmi, namely, the Nilambur kovilagam. In accordance with the provision of the said Act, the first petitioner is entitled to be served with notice of the suo motu enquiry. Nonetheless, in the appeal preferred before line Director of Survey and settlement, Madras, challenging the order passed by the Assistant Settlement officer above referred, the order passed by him was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh enquiry. Even so, a revision filed by the District forest Officer, first respondent of the B party before Land Commissioner challenging the remand order was however dismissed. As such, the fresh enquiry before the Assistant Settlement Officer, Gudalur, was pending disposal. Pursuant thereto, by a communication dated 9. 10. 1987, first petitioner had been advised to put forth his case, substantiated by documents with objections if any.

(3.) BY passing the above order, process were issued in accordance with the procedural law and consequently, learned Magistrate by virtue of the powers vested under clauses (1) and (2) of Sec. 146 of the Code of criminal Procedure, on the same day attached all the standing crops in the disputed land and put them in the custody of the court and directed the Village administrative Officer of the Padanthorai Village of Gudalur Taluk, as the official Receiver in respect of the said property to exercise the powers and duties conferred under Sec. 146 (2) of the Code and thus, it is seen that by passing the abovesaid order, learned Magistrate has called for both parties to appear before the court on 19. 7. 1991 and file all documents and materials before the court in respect of their respective cases.