JUDGMENT:

Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. -- Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of the learned Single Judge of the Kerala High Court allowing the Civil Revision Petition.

2. Respondent-State of Kerala filed a Civil Revision Petition under Section 103 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 (in short the 'Act'). Challenge in the revision was to the order of the Taluk Land Board, dated 22.2.1991 holding that the declarant was liable only to surrender an extent of 0.26.250 acres of land. Stand of the State was that the property held by the so-called Wakf of which the declarant was Muthavalli was to be included while determining the extent of land held by the predecessors of the appellant.

3. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:

The predecessor of the appellants (hereinafter called the declarant) filed a statement under Section 85 of the Act. After an enquiry the Taluk Land Board determined that the declarant held an extent of 2.5.700 acres of land in excess of the ceiling area. An extent of 2.55 acres was taken possession of. On the ground that the declarant had failed to disclose certain other lands held by him, the Taluk Land Board reopened the matter and after hearing the declarant passed a revised order dated 13.12.1977 holding that a further extent of 5.42.500 acres of land is also liable to be surrendered by the declarant.

4. declarant filed C.R.P.4053 of 1977 before the High Court. The High Court held that certain lands acquired by the declarant after 1.1.1970 were also sought to be included by the Taluk Land Board and the same could not be done. Apparently, the High Court took the view that such subsequent acquisitions could be considered only in a proceeding initiated under Section 87 of the Act. Deleting the extent of land acquired after 1.1.1970 the High Court directed the Taluk Land Board to consider whether an extent of 3.13 acres allegedly set apart for a Madrassa was liable be included or was liable to be exempted on the ground that it was a Wakf property. The High Court gave an opportunity to the declarant to establish that the income from the said extent wholly went to the Wakf and. not to the personal account of the declarant. Thus clarifying that in the present proceeding the Taluk Land Board was only concerned with the land held by the declarant as on 1.1.1970 the High Court directed a re-examination of the claim regarding 3.13 acres of land.

5. Taluk Land Board thereafter passed an order on 13.12.1982 holding that the declarant had not produced any reliable evidence to show that the income from properties allegedly set apart for the Madrassa went to the Wakf except two registers said to be the account books of income and expenditure which was found to be unreliable. The Taluk Land Board held that the registers were seen to be written up recently and there was nothing to show that those accounts related to the properties in question. The Taluk Land Board also entered a finding that its enquiry revealed that only a share of the income goes to the Madrassa and the major portion goes to the personal account of the declarant. The Taluk Land Board therefore held that in the absence of evidence, properties could not be deleted from the account of the declarant. The Taluka Land Board thereupon directed that the declarant was bound to surrender an extent of 2.93.500 acres of land.

6. declarant filed another Revision before the High Court as C.R.P.3618 of 1982. Pending the revision the declarant died and his legal representatives were impleaded as additional petitioners. By order dated 7.7.1989 the High Court held that a fresh enquiry as ordered by it has not been conducted by the Taluk Land Board regarding the claim of exclusion on the ground of the lands being dedicated to a Wakf and the reliance