IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 3RD APRIL 2009 / 13TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 11065 of 2009(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- RAJI S. SINDHU,W/O. K. MAHESH, RAJ BHAVAN, MALOOR P.O., PATTAZHY VADAKKEKARA VILLAGE, PATHANPURAM TALUK, KOLLAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KOLLAM. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PUTHOOR VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM. 4. SRI. REJENDRAN NAIR, S/O. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, PANIKKARIZHIKATHU DEVAI MANDIRAM, CHERUMANGAD MURI, PAVITHRESWARAM PUTHOOR VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKAR.P.O.,. KOLLAM. MR.P.N.SANTHOSH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.11065 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 3rd day of April, 2009 J U D G M E N T In respect of the property covered by Ext.P2 settlement deed, Ext.P4 application was submitted before the 2nd respondent praying for effecting mutation in favour of the 4th respondent, for the reason that, the petitioner executed Ext.P3 conveying the property in favour of the 4th respondent. The petitioner submits that on receipt of the application referred to as above, the 2nd respondent expressed some reservations in effecting the mutation sought for. The petitioner states that although, she submitted her explanation by Exts.P6 & P7, the 2nd respondent forwarded the matter for obtaining the opinion of the additional Government Pleader, who communicated his opinion as per Ext.P9 to the effect that nothing stands in the way of passing orders on Ext.P4. Despite all these, the 2nd respondent has not passed final orders on Ext.P4 and therefore, the writ petition has been filed. 2. If as stated by the petitioner, by Ext.P9, also the additional Government Pleader has clarified the position, it is up to WP(C) No.11065/2009 -2- the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P4 in the light of Exts.P6, P7 & P9. 3. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 in the manner as observed above. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month of production of a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this writ petition. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg