Padmanabhan v. State Of Kerala

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL 2015/20TH CHAITHRA, 1937 WP(C).No. 11655 of 2015 (F) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

-------------------------- PADMANABHAN, S/O.SUBBARAO, RESIDING NEAR MOONKILMADA CHECK POST, KOZHIPATHY VILLAGE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

BY ADV. SRI.P.R.VENKETESH.

RESPONDENT(S):

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

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

2. THE TALUK LAND BOARD, CHITTUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN.

BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.JOSEPH GEORGE.

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-04-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

rs.

WP(C).No. 11655 of 2015 (F) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- P1TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 15.04.1972 IN PASSED BY THE LAND TRIBUNAL, CHITTUR IN OA NO.266/1972.

P2TRUE COPY OF ASSIGNMENT DEED NO.52/1972.

P3TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 28.02.2015 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE TALUK LAND BOARD, CHITTUR. P4TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 29.08.2014 IN CRP NO.202/2010 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.

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

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

-------------------------------------------- W.P(C). No. 11655 of 2015 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of April, 2015

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers:

"a) issue a writ of mandamus or any appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Taluk Land Board, 2nd respondent herein to pass appropriate orders in 7E application, Ext.P3 filed by the petitioner within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court; and b) issue such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem just and fit in the circumstances of the case."

2.

Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 3.

Considering the limited extent of relief sought for, this Court does not find it necessary to go into the merit of the case. In the said circumstance, the 2nd respondent is directed to consider Ext.P3, in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other interested parties, if any. It shall be done, at the earliest, at any rate, within 'three months' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

WP(c). No.11655 of 2015 The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the 2nd respondent for further steps.

Sd/- P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.

Pn