Ramachandra Menon, J.

1. Ext.P10 order passed by the 2nd respondent herein (pursuant to Ext.P9 verdict passed by a Division Bench of this Court in D.B.P.No.138/2012 for finalising the statutory appeal in terms of the relevant provisions of The Kerala Land Conservancy Act, 1957) is under challenge. The basic question to be considered is whether the remand ordered by the 2nd respondent after setting aside Ext.P8 order passed by the 4th respondent, for not having obtained consent of the District Collector (allegedly as stipulated under Section 13A of The Kerala Survey and Boundaries Act, 1961) is correct or sustainable, more so when no such stipulation is seen from the said provision.

2. A brief description of the factual position is necessary, to have clarity as to the sequence of events and proceedings which resulted in Ext.P10. The petitioner is stated as an ardent devotee of Udayathumvathil Sree Krishna Swamy temple and was a member of the Temple Advisory Committee, whose tenure is admittedly over. He is aggrieved of the encroachment of the Devaswom property by the nearby inhabitants; particularly the respondents 6 to 11. It is stated that the encroachment on the Devaswom