The court emphasized the need for fair hearing before administrative orders affecting burial rights under specific statutes.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ext.P8 order passed by the 3^rd respondent District Collector and Ext.P9 order issued by the 9^th respondent Grama Panchayat.

2. It is averred that the petitioner is a Society registered under the provisions of the Societies Registration Act , working for the benefits of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes community. The members of the above stated Society used to bury the dead bodies of their family members in a property having an extent of 5 acres of land in Sy. No. 133 of Arikady Village. The petitioner submits that the said property has been used for burying dead bodies since time immemorial and, therefore, the same is covered by Rule 4 of the Kerala Panchayat (Burial and Burning Grounds) Rules, 1998 (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules, 1998”). For maintaining the said land as a burial ground, the petitioner approached the Kerala State Commission for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes, who after obtaining a report from the Grama Panchayat as well as the Tahsildar, passed Ext.P3 order directing the authorities to take steps to maintain the said property as a burial ground, after including the same in the asset register of the Panchayat. Consequently, Ext.P4 order was issued by the District Collector also, to take appropriate steps in this regard. Thereafter the Village Officer also directed the Secretary of the 9th respondent Grama Panchayat to take appropriate steps to construct a gas crematorium in the said land. While so, the 10^th respondent, who is the neighbouring property owner, approached this Court filing W.P.(C)No.22211/2021. This Court as per Ext.P7 judgment, disposed of the same directing the District Collector to consider the grievance raised by the petitioner therein, which culminated in Ext.P8 order, wherein a direction was issued to the respondent Panchayat to include the said property in the asset register and to stop the burial of dead bodies in the said property. Consequently, Ext.P9 proceedings have been issued by the respondent Panchayat. It is aggrieved by the same that the present writ petition has been filed.

3. A detailed counter affidavit has been filed by the 10th respondent contending that on an earlier occasion, when an attempt was made to bury dead bodies in the said property, they approached the Munsiff Court, Kasaragod filing O.S.No.374/2006. Later, the said suit was settled between the parties, whereby 20 cents of land was sold to the respondent therein, which is another registered organisation and submits that the petitioner has absolutely no right to bury the dead bodies in the land owned by the Panchayat.

4. The respondent Panchayat also opposed the reliefs sought for by the petitioner in this writ petition, by filing a detailed counter affidavit.

5. Heard the rival contentions on both sides.

6. Admittedly, the petitioner has approached the Kerala State Commission for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe, which resulted in Ext.P3 order and it is to be seen that the respondent in the said proceedings is the District Collector, Kasaragod (the 3^rd respondent). It is further to be noted that further proceedings pursuant Ext.P3 was issued by the District Collector himself. The specific case of the petitioner is that in spite of all these, Ext.P8 order was issued by the District Collector, without affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, and since such an opportunity was not granted, the petitioner could not apprise the District Collector regarding the correct factual situation including their entitlement as per Rule 4 of the Rules, 1998. Therefore, I am of the view that the matter requires reconsideration at the hands of the District Collector. To facilitate the sam