- (1.) The State of Kerala, having obtained leave of this Court in Special Leave Petition (C) No. 13411 of 1987, appeals against the judgment of a learned single Judge of the High Court of Kerala, rendered in C.R.P. No. 2538 of 1981 dated 1-7-1987. The matter arises under the Kerala Land Reforms Act in connection with the proceedings relating to determination of ceiling area of the 1st respondent, by the Taluk Land Board, Taliparamba (hereinafter referred to as the 'Board') in T.L.B. 447 of 1977. The Board initiated proceedings, T.L.B. 447 of 1977 and issued notice to late respondent No. 1, head of the family, to surrender an extent of 6.32 acres of land, which according to the Board is the land, the family headed by the first respondent was holding in excess of the ceiling area. Respondent No. 2 is the wife of the first respondent. In the said proceedings, respondents Nos. 3 and 4 (sisters of the first respondent) sought impleadment under Section 85(8) of the Land Reforms Act, to set aside the proceedings of the order of Board dated 28-6-1977 and claimed tenancy rights over an extent of property measuring 10 acres, in R.S. Nos. 201 and 208 of Naduvil village, Taliparamba. The impleadment petition was rejected by the Board on 7-10-1977. Respondents Nos. 1 and 2 filed C.R.P. No. 3440 of 1977 before the High Court of Kerala, which was disposed of on 2-11-1977, the relevant portion of which reads as follows :- "The declarant in ceiling proceedings No. 447/77(TBA) on the file of the Taluk Land Board. Taliparamba was directed by the Taluk Land Board by its order dated 28-6-1977 to surrender an extent of 6.32 acres or land held by his family in excess of the ceiling limit. This two petitioners, who are the sisters of the declarant, filed an application under Section 85(8) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act for reopening the order contending that they are cultivating tenants in respect of the property with respect to an extent of 10 acres. The Taluk Land Board after having gone into the evidence placed before it found that no proof regarding the alleged vacancy was produced before the Taluk Land Board and that the cultivating tenancy alleged was a collusive attempt between the brother and the sisters to defeat the provisions of the Act. It cannot be said that the Taluk Land Board has either decided erroneously of failed to decide a question of law to attract Section 103 of the Act. The revision is therefore dismissed without admitting in the file." (Emphasis supplied.)
(2.) The first respondent also challenged the proceedings dated 28-6-1977, by which he was directed to surrender 6.32 acres of land, in C.R.P. No. 3696 of 1977. The Civil Revision Petition was allowed by order dated 14-3-1979 and the operative portion of the order reads as follows :- "I do not think that I should go into the merits of the objections raised by the petitioner in regard to the fixation of the ceiling area in view of the fact that the impugned order is in a suo motu proceedings where the proceedings have been initiated not on intimation given by the Land Board about the non-filing of the statement as required by Section 85(7) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act. However, the order was sought to be supported by the learned Government pleader on the ground that they have subsequently ratified the proceedings before the final order was actually issued. In the nature of the provision in Section 85(7) that may not validate the proceedings which would render such proceedings void in law cannot be cured by ratification. No doubt, the disposal of the C.R.P. by quashing the impugned order on this ground will not prevent the Taluk Land Board for proceedings the matter afresh on due, intimation to the Land Board and in accordance with law." (Emphasis supplied)
(3.) In pursuance to the later order of the High Court, the Board issued a revised draft statement and issued notice to respondents Nos. 1 and 2 calling upon them to file objections, if any. No objections were filed. However, respondents Nos. 3 and 4 filed a fresh petition for impleadment on 30-6-1980, which was allowed by the majority members of the Board on 29-7-1980. The majority members of the Board, by proceedings dated 9-1-1981, accepted the plea put forward by respondents Nos. 3 and 4 regarding tenancy and further held that respondent No. 1 was holding lands only within the ceiling limit. There was no surplus land to be surrendered. The aforesaid decision was assailed by the State of Kerala before the High Court in C.R.P. No. 2538/81. The learned single Judge of the High Court of Kerala, by order dated 1-7-1987, held thus:- "The order in C.R.P. No. 3696/77 has become final. It can be seen from the said order that the S.M. proceedings initiated by the T.L.B. was declared void and hence non est. That being the position, it is needless to say that the proceedings from which C.R.P. 3440 of 1977 arose also is non est. It cannot therefore be said that the rights of the parties to the said proceedings has been determined by any authority constituted under the K.L.R. Act." On the merits, the learned single Judge also held that it cannot be said that the Board decided any question of law erroneously or failed to decide any question of law to merit interference in exercise of the revisional powers vested under Section 103 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act. It is from the aforesaid order of the High Court, the State had filed the present appeal.;