Shaffique, J.

1. The petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

i) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order quashing that part of Ext.P11, which purports to remand the matter to the District Collector, Idukki for final disposal;

ii) Declare that the proceedings under the Cardamom rules, 1935 and the Land Assignment Rules, 1964, initiated against the petitioner stand dropped and terminated by Ext. P11;

iii) Declare that the proceedings under the Cardamom Rule, 1935, Land Assignment Rule, 1964, and the Land Conservancy Act and rules and the actions of the Task force, Munnar against the petitioner are illegal, arbitrary, and ultra-vires the Constitution;

iv) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to pay an amount of Rs.15,00,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Crores only) to the petitioner as compensation/damages for demolition of the resort/structures of the petitioner in violation of the Fundamental Rights of the petitioner; v) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to hand over possession of the properties resumed by Ext.P1 to the petitioner forthwith;"

2. The facts involved in the writ petition would disclose that an order of resumption was passed by the District Collector in respect of land in the possession of the petitioner having an extent of 1.00.68 hectares situated in Sy.Nos.130/1, 130/2 and 87/1 of Chinnakkanal village. According to the petitioner, out of the aforesaid extent of land, 34.32 Ares coming under Sy.Nos.130/1 and 130/2 were forming part of patta land under the Cardamom Rules, 1935. The balance extent of land coming under Sy.No.87/1 forms part of land assignment pattas as per LA Nos. 41/77 and 15/77. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Land Revenue Commissioner who had set aside the order passed by the District Collector by finding that there is violation of the principles of natural justice. The matter is remitted back to the District Collector.

3. Immediately after the order of resumption was passed by the District Collector by way of Ext.P1 dated 29/5/2007, petitioner preferred an appeal before the Land Revenue Commissioner as per Ext.P2 dated 31/05/2007. He also submitted an application for stay of further proceedings. Writ petition W.P.C.No.16732 of 2007 was also filed apprehending immediate action for resumption. The writ petition was dismissed reserving right to agitate the matter before the appellate authority. An appeal was filed before the Division Bench as W.A.No.1272 of 2007. The Division Bench did not interfere, but 24 hours time was granted to remove the furnitures and fixtures. Though the petitioner moved for stay of proceedings before the Land Revenue Commissioner, by the time the petitioner was dispossessed and the buildings in the property was demolished.

4. It is inter alia contended that the Government has no right in respect of the property coming under Sy.Nos.130/1 and 130/2. Since Cardamom Rules, 1935 is no longer in force, it is not open for the District Collector to invoke Rule 28 and even otherwise he has no jurisdiction to invoke Rule 28, the competent authority being the Government. Orders had been issued by the District Collector in gross violation of the principles of natural justice and the buildings had been demolished without a proper order being passed in the matter. Hence the petitioner seeks the reliefs as sought for. It is inter alia contended that the Land Revenue Commissioner has no power to remit the matter back to the District Collector. Its power to confirm, vary or cancel under Rule 21(8) of the Land Assignment Rules 1964 does not enable remand.

5. Counter affidavit is filed by the 4th respondent inter alia stating that the petitioner has already filed a suit for declaration of title in respect of the very same property in O.S.No.57/2007. Hence petitioner is not entitled to seek any relief in the presen