Ashok Bhushan, Ag. C.J.

1. The District Collector, Idukki and three other State officials are in appeal against the judgment dated 11.4.2014 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P(C). No.7093 of 2013 filed by respondents 1 and 2, who were the writ petitioners in the Writ Petition. The learned Single Judge, while disposing of the Writ Petition although held that it shall be open for the petitioners to approach the competent Civil Court to establish their special right claimed in the Writ Petition, however, the learned Single Judge further directed the State respondent to make an opening in the new compound wall of the Mini Civil Station existing on the western side of the petitioners' building to permit the petitioners a right of way and further directed the State Government to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-.

2. The facts of the case, which are necessary to be noted for deciding the issues raised in the Writ Appeal are:

In Thodupuzha Taluk, Idukki District, a Mini Civil Station, consisting of 22 Government offices, including Family Court and Treasury, is situated in Sy.No.194/13 having an extent of 0.72.44 hectares of property. To east of the Mini Civil Station there is Sy.No.194/12/1 housing a building, 'Madonna Textiles'. On the south of both the survey numbers there is the Thodupuzha-Muvattupuzha Road having a width of more than 15 metres. The petitioners claimed to have purchased the property situated in Sy.No.194/12/1 by ten sale deeds in the year 1985-1986. On the eastern side of the Mini Civil Station an old compound wall of more than 60 years was in existence. Notice dated 9.9.1991 was issued to the petitioners by the Tahsildar for stopping the construction of staircase on the western side of the petitioners' property, i.e., on the eastern side of the Taluk Office compound. Another notice was issued on 12.2.1999 on the petitioners under Act 8 of 1958, the Kerala Land Conservancy Act, 1957 stating that the petitioners have unauthorisedly trespassed into the Government puramboke land in Sy.No.194/13 to the extent of 64 sq.mts. After receipt of the said notice, the petitioners gave Exhibit P10 notice to the respondents under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure for instituting a suit before the competent Civil Court. In the notice under Section 80 CPC it was stated that even assuming that the petitioners and their predecessors-in-interest are in possession of some Government land lying beyond the eastern compound wall of the Taluk Office property, the petitioners have become the absolute owners thereof, in view of the long open continued uninterrupted possession for more than half a century. In the notice the petitioners stated that they will institute a suit for declaration that they had become absolute owners in possession of entire properties lying to the east of the compound wall and retaining wall of the Taluk Office compound. However, no suit was filed by the petitioners, but they submitted Exhibit P13 joint statement on 6.4.1999 stating that they are not in possession of any Government land and even though there is any Government land beyond the compound wall, the petitioners and their predecessors being in continuous possession, the right of the Government, if any, has been lost by adverse possession and limitation and the petitioners have become owners of the land. Notice dated 8.6.2007 was issued to the petitioners to appear along with the receipt of payment of pattam as claimed in Sy.No.194/13 and show the records regarding possession of the petitioners. Another notice dated 21.4.2012 Exhibit P15 was issued regarding lease No.K.P.1/1977 to the extent of 0.225 cents. The petitioners sent Exhibit P16 reply to Exhibit P15 notice praying for renewal of lease K.P.1/1977. It was also stated in the reply that as per the condition of the lease agreement, a portion of the compound wall is to be demolished and a gate has to be fixed. Prayer for renewal of the lease was also made. The State Government b