The decision of an authority must be backed by clear reasoning to comply with natural justice principles; failure to provide such reasoning renders the order invalid.

JUDGMENT

Anil K. Narendran, J.

The petitioner, who is a Canadian Citizen born in New Delhi, holder of Ext.P1 Overseas Citizen of India Card issued from the Foreigners Regional Registration Office, Mumbai, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P10 order dated 29.06.2024 of the 3^rd respondent Tahsildar, Thodupuzha Taluk; a writ of mandamus commanding the 2^nd respondent Village Officer, Elappally, Thodupuzha, to conduct site inspection of the properties covered by Exts.P2 and P3 sale deeds bearing Nos.498/2023 and 499/2023 of Sub Registrar Office, Arakkulam dated 27.05.2023 and submit a report to the 3^rd respondent, Tahsildar, with a copy to the petitioner; and a writ of mandamus commanding the 3^rd respondent Tahsildar to effect mutation of the properties covered by Exts.P2 and P3 sale deeds, in favour of the petitioner, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible.

2. Ext.P2 sale deed is in respect of the property having an extent of 14.16 Ares comprised in Re.Sy.No.194/10 in Block No.22 (Old Sy.No.760/1B/18) of Elappally Village, Thodupuzha Taluk and Ext.P3 sale deed is in respect of the property having an extent of 1 Hectare and 65 Ares comprised in Re.Sy.No.196/3, Block No.22 (Old Sy.Nos.760/1B/18 and 760/1B/18/98 of Elappally Village, Thodupuzha Taluk. Ext.P4 is a copy of land tax receipt dated 24.05.2023 issued by the 2^nd respondent Village Officer accepting land tax from respondents 6 to 8, who are the vendors in Ext.P3 sale deed. Ext.P5 is a copy of the Thandaper account in the name of respondents 6 to 8. Ext.P6 is a copy of land tax receipt dated 04.05.2023 issued by the 2^nd respondent Village Officer accepting land tax from the 5^th respondent, who is the vendor in Ext.P2 sale deed and Ext.P7 is a copy of the Thandaper account in the name of the 5^th respondent. Going by the averments in the writ petition, after purchasing the properties vide Exts.P2 and P3 sale deeds, the petitioner submitted applications for effecting mutation. However, the application was rejected. The details regarding the rejection of the applications were not furnished to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner submitted Ext.P8 request dated 27.03.2024 before the 4^th respondent District Collector, Idukki to complete the process of effecting mutation. After the submission of Ext.P8, the petitioner received Ext.P9 notice dated 04.05.2024 issued by the 3^rd respondent Tahsildar, whereby she was directed to appear in the Taluk office, Thodupuzha, on 28.05.2024 at 11.00 a.m. for attending the personal hearing. After conducting a personal hearing, the 3^rd respondent Tahsildar passed Ext.P10 order dated 29.06.2024, whereby the applications made by the petitioner for effecting mutation of the properties covered by Exts.P2 and P3 sale deeds were rejected on the ground that the properties purchased by the petitioner are agricultural lands and the petitioner being the holder of an Overseas Citizen of India Card, does not have permission to purchase agricultural land. Challenging Ext.P10 order of the 3^rd respondent Tahsildar, the petitioner is before this Court in this writ petition, seeking the aforesaid reliefs.

3. In the writ petition, it is contended that Ext.P10 order of the 3^rd respondent Tahsildar is one passed without conducting a proper inspection of the properties covered by Exts.P2 and P3 sale deeds. In Ext.P10 order, the 3^rd respondent has referred to a report bearing No.76/2024 dated 09.05.2024 submitted by the 2^nd respondent Village Officer, in which it is stated that the properties covered by Exts.P2 and P3 sale deeds are agricultural l