High Court of KeralaWP(C)/17725/2015disposed of

George Eapen v. The District Collector

2015-06-15Honourable Mr.Justice K.Vinod Chandran3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/25TH JYAISHTA, 1937 WP(C).No. 17725 of 2015 (M) ---------------------------- PETITIONER:

-------------------- GEORGE EAPEN, S/O.EAPEN, KOTTAPPALLIL CHARUMMOOTTIL HOUSE, NIRANAM P.O., THIRUVALLA.

BY ADVS.SRI.T.P.PRADEEP SRI.P.K.SATHEES KUMAR RESPONDENT(S):

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

1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, PATHANAMTHITTA - 689 645.

2. THE R.D.O., REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, THIRUVALLA - 689 101.

3. AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHI BAHAVN, NIRANAM P.O. - 689 621.

4. THE SECRETARY, AGRICULTURAL DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.K.SOYUZ THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

mbr/

WP(C).No. 17725 of 2015 (M) ---------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

------------------------------------- P1:

TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED DOCUMENT NO: 308/2006 OF KADAPRA SUB REGISTRY DATED 7/4/2006.

P2:

TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PETITIONER'S LAND. P3:

TRUE COPY OF THE MAHAZAR DATED 2/3/2012 PREPARED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, NIRANAM.

P4:

TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 27/5/2015. P5:

TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 11/6/2015 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

NIL.

//TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE mbr/

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.

------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No. 17725 of 2015 (M) ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 15th day of June, 2015

J U D G M E N T

The only prayer of the petitioner is that the petitioner has filed a revision against Ext.P4 order of the District Collector under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008. The petitioner prays that status quo may be directed till the revision is considered on merits.

Considering the confined prayer made, there shall be a status quo till the revision is disposed of, specifically observing that the petitioner also shall not interfere further with the nature and lie of the property till the revision is disposed of. The 4th respondent shall dispose of the revision as expeditiously as possible. Writ Petition is disposed of.

Sd/- K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE jjj