Devan Ramachandran, J.

When the hearing commenced in this appeal, we were under the impression that the primary issue herein involves a question as to whether the owner of a property, which is brought to sale under the provisions of Revenue Recovery Act ('the Act' for brevity) and bid on behalf of the Government, thus treating it as bought-in-land, can seek reconveyance of the same once the liability, against which revenue recovery action had been initiated, has been paid off subsequently either in full or under the terms of an Amnesty Scheme. The answer to this particular question is of course no longer res integra and is covered by several judgments of this Court, including State of Kerala and Others v. George Jacob (2010 (3) KLT 483), Laxmi Devi Tile Works v. District Collector, Thrissur (2009 (2) KLT 587 and Sibi Francis v. State of Kerala (2013 (2) KLT SN 82).

2. We notice that the learned Single Judge also proceeded to deal with the writ petition as if the only issue involved is as regards the re-conveyance of a bought-in-land and going by the settled principles of law, as enunciated in the above said judgments, went on to conclude in paragraph 7 as under:

“Taking into