JUDGMENT

PARIPOORNAN, J. - 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 Judgment of the High Court of Kerala, rendered in CRP 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 first respondent, by the Taluk Land Board, Taliparamba (hereinafter referred to as the Board) in TLB No. 447 of 1977. The Board initiated proceedings, TLB No. 447 of 1977 and issued notice to late Respondent 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 2 is the wife of the first respondent. In the said proceedings, Respondents 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 the Board dated 28-6-1977 and claimed tenancy rights over an extent of property measuring 10 acres, in RS Nos. 201 and 208 of Naduvil Village, Taliparamba. The impleadment petition was rejected by the Board on 7-10-1977. Respondents 1 and 2 filed CRP 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 of 1977 (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 of land held by his family in excess of the ceiling limit. These 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 tenancy 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 or failed to decide a question of law to attract Section 103 of the Act. The revision is therefore dismissed without admitting in the file."

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 CRP No. 3696 of 1977. The civil revision petition was allowed by order dated 14-3-1979 and the operative potion 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 CRP by quashing the impugned order on this ground will not prevent the Taluk Land Board for proceeding in the matter afresh on due intimation to the land board and in accordance with Law."

3. In pursuance to the latter order of the High Court, the Board issued a revised draft statement and issued notice to Respondents 1 and 2 calling upon them to file objections, if any. No objections were filed. However, Respondents 3 and 4 filed a fresh petition