High Court of KeralaWP(C)/1347/2015disposed of

Mohammed Sali v. The Land Revenue Commissioner

2015-01-14Honourable Mr.Justice P.R.Ramachandra Menon3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY 2015/24TH POUSHA, 1936 WP(C).No. 1347 of 2015 (P) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

-------------------------- MOHAMMED SALI, S/O. MUHAMMED KUTTY, NEKKAREKKAD HOUSE, MOODAMBAIL VILLAGE, MEEYAPPADAVU POST, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

BY ADV. SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN.

RESPONDENT(S):

----------------------------

1. THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER, LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONERATE, MUSEUM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

2. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KASARAGOD-671 001.

3. TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, MANJESWARAM, KASARAGOD-671 001.

4. VILLAGE OFFICER, MOODAMBAIL VILLAGE, MOODAMBAIL, KASARAGOD-671 001.

BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.JOSEPH GEORGE.

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-01-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

rs.

WP(C).No. 1347 of 2015 (P) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 14.07.2013.

P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 14.11.2012 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.07.2013 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 17.07.2014.

P5 - TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION WITHOUT ANNEXURE SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs.

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

======================== W.P.(C). No. 1347 of 2015 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of January, 2015

JUDGMENT

Ext.P3 order passed by the 3rd respondent on 15.07.2013 has been subjected to challenge before the 2nd respondent, who passed Ext.P4 order dated 17.07.2014. This in turn is challenged by filing Ext.P5 revision petition before the 1st respondent. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the prayer is only to cause the same to be considered and disposed of within a reasonable time.

2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.

3. Considering the limited nature of relief sought for, this Court does not find it necessary to go into the merits of the case. The writ petition is disposed of, directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P5 in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner at the earliest, at any rate, within 'three months' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 'Status quo' shall be maintained till such time. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the first respondent for further steps. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.

kp/-