An order passed by a quasi-judicial authority or tribunal against a deceased individual without the presence or involvement of their legal representatives is void for lack of jurisdiction.

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER BEARING NO.LRT:502:503:80-81 (ULLALA) DATED 01ST APRIL, 1998 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2-LAND TRIBUNAL VIDE ANNEXURE-A; REMAND THE MATTER BACK TO RESPONDENT NO.2-LAND TRIBUNAL, MANGALURU FOR FRESH ENQUIRY AND PROVIDE OPPORTUNITY TO THE PETITIONER TO MAKE HER CLAIM.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH

ORAL ORDER

1. In this petition, the petitioner is challenging the order bearing No.LRT:502:503:80-81 dated 01st April, 1998 (Annexure-A) passed by the respondent No.2-Land Tribunal inter alia sought for remanding the matter back to the respondent No.2-Land Tribunal, Magaluru for fresh enquiry by providing an opportunity to the petitioner to make her claim.

2. Heard Sri. Nishal S. Reddy, learned counsel on behalf of Sri. Abhishek Marla, appearing for the petitioner; Sri. B.J. Eswarappa, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 and 2; and Sri. Girish M.K., learned counsel appearing for respondents 3 to 7.

3. Sri. Nishal S. Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the legal representative of deceased Chandravathy, who was the landlord of the land in question and the respondent No.2-Land Tribunal, without hearing to the petitioner or the legal representatives of the petitioner, had passed the impugned order dated 01st April, 1998, granting occupancy right in favour of the father of respondents 3 to 7 in respect of the land in question. Accordingly, learned counsel appearing for petitioner sought for interference of this Court.

4. Per contra, Sri. B.J. Eswarappa, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and Sri. Girish M.K., learned counsel appearing for respondents 3 to 7 sought to justify the impugned order passed by the respondent No.2.

5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the averments made in the writ petition, it is forthcoming that, this Court, by order dated 17th December, 1982 in Writ Petition No.20946/1981 remanded the matter to the respondent No.2-Land Tribunal and pursuant to the same, the respondent No.2-Land Tribunal passed the impugned order dated 01st April, 1998 (Annexure-A). On perusal of the Death Certificate produced at Annexure-B, it is forthcoming that the landlord Chandravathy died on 11th March, 1991. Therefore, it is clear that the impugned order dated 01st April, 1998 (Annexure-A) has been passed after the death of landlord Chandravathy.

6. Following the law declared by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kiran Singh and Others vs. Chaman Paswan and Others reported in AIR 1954 SC, 340, I am of the considered opinion that the respondent No.2-Land Tribunal has no jurisdiction to pass the impugned order against the dead person. Therefore, I pass the following:

O R D E R

(i) Writ Petition allowed;

(ii) Order dated 01st April, 1998 (Annexure-A) passed by the respondent No.2-Land Tribunal is hereby set-aside and matter is remitted back to the respondent No.2-Land Tribunal for considering the issue afresh and take decision in the matter, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned.