IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 8TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 17TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 33627 of 2010(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- BABU AGED 47, S/O,.VISWAMBHARAN, MADATHIPPARAMBIL HOUSE,VELLIKULANGARA VILLAGE, KODALY DESOM, PO.PADY,MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.N.VINODKUMAR SMT.P.LAKSHMY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE,AYYANTHOLE,THRISSUR - 680 003. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD SUB DIVISION, IRINJALAKUDA-680 125. 3. THE SUPERINTEND OF LAND SURVEY & RECORDS AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR-680003. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENEUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. MR.P.N.SANTHOSH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P (C) No.33627 of 2010 -------------------------- Dated this the 8th November, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner challenges Ext.P2 notice issued by the second respondent, under Rule 13A of the Kerala Land Conservancy Rules requiring the petitioner to remove the structure mentioned therein. On receipt of Ext.P2, petitioner has filed Exts. P3 and P4 representations before the second and third respondents and has filed this writ petition complaining that the representations are not considered. 2. However, pleadings show that prior to the issuance of Ext.P2 notice, survey of the area in question was already conducted and that in that survey it was revealed that the structure mentioned in Ext.P2, was in puramboke land. It is on that basis, Ext.P2 notice has been issued. 3. Survey mentioned above has become final and no proceedings challenging the same are pending. If that be so, Ext.P2 is only consequential in nature and therefore W.P (C) No.33627 of 2010 2 petitioner cannot challenge Ext.P2. 4. In that view of the matter, I am not persuaded to think that respondents are obliged to consider Exts.P3 and P4. The writ petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE ma