← Library
High Court of KeralaWP(C)/29757/2015disposed of

Sunil P.P. v. The District Collector

2015-09-303 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015/8TH ASWINA, 1937 WP(C).No. 29757 of 2015 (T) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

----------------------- 1.

SUNIL P.P., S/O.KUNHALI, PUTHENPEEDIKA, CHAPPANGATHOTTAM, AREACODE P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

2.

ANILKUMAR P., S/O.MUNDATHAN, KODATHUPARAMBU HOUSE, NORTH KOZHAKOTTUR, AREACODE P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

BY ADVS.SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS (SR.) SRI.PAUL JACOB (P) SRI.S.SREEDEV RESPONDENT(S):

-------------------------- 1.

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM - 673 639.

2.

THE SUB COLLECTOR, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 673 639.

3.

AREACODE GRAMA PANCHAYAT, AREACODE P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY - 673 639.

R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.C.K.SHERIN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30-09-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: msv/

WP(C).No. 29757 of 2015 (T) ---------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

-------------------------------------- EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DTD.18.8.2014 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT SEEKING PERMISSION\ UNDER THE LAND UTILIZATION ORDER TO CONVERT 95.65 CENTS. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS DTD.28.9.2015.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

----------------------------------------- NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S.TO JUDGE Msv/

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

***************************************************************************** W.P.(C) No.29757 of 2015 ****************************************************************************** Dated this the 30th day of September, 2015

JUDGMENT

Petitioners limited prayer before this Court is that an objection raised before the District Collector shall be considered while considering the application submitted by the third respondent Panchayath for reclamation of paddy land.

In view of the above, the second respondent is directed to consider the objection if the proceedings have not been concluded sofar. The petitioners are free to place any evidence before the second respondent to substantiate their objection. The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE ln