IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 28TH MAY 2009 / 7TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 14638 of 2009(Y) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- UNNIKRISHNAN, S/O.GOVINDAPILLAI, UMAVIHAR, KURAKKANNI, VARKALA. BY ADV. MR.J.S.AJITHKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER (SUB COLLECTOR), CIVIL STATION, KODAPPANAKUNNU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. VILLAGE OFFICER, VARKALA. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.P.N. SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Rs/ V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No. 14638 of 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 28th May,2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner claims to be the owner in possession of 99 cents of property in Survey No.13 of Varkala Village which is covered by Exhibit-P1 sale deed. The nature of the property is shown as paddy land converted into garden land. But according to the petitioner, there has been no paddy cultivation for almost 80 years. Petitioner is in possession of the property and while so Exhibit-P2 memo was issued by the 2nd respondent under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order. Petitioner filed Exhibit P6 objections thereto and according to him without any further enquiry or hearing, Exhibits P8 has been issued by the RDO and communicated by the Village Officer under Exhibit-P7. This has been challenged in the writ petition. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader. W.P ( C) No. 14638 of 2009 2 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner is correct in submitting that Exhibit-P8 is not a speaking order. Objections filed by the petitioner ought to have been considered. Accordingly, the RDO shall proceed to pass a reasoned order considering Exhibit-P6 as an objection to Exhibit-P8, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Any materials which have been placed by the petitioner before the RDO shall also be considered. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (V.GIRI,JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No. 14638 of 2009 3 W.P ( C) No. 14638 of 2009 4