IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 12TH AUGUST 2010 / 21ST SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 25312 of 2010(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. P.M.ANSARI, PRIYADARSINI, KACHERI ROAD, CHANGANASSERY. 2. M.JAMEELA, PRIYADARSINI, KACHERI ROAD, CHANGANASSERY. BY ADV. SRI.T.H.ABDUL AZEEZ SRI.P.HMOHAMMED BASHEER RAWTHER RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, CHANGANACHERRY. 4. THE JOINT SECRETARY, REVENUE(A) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. SHAJIMA IBRAHIM, AYSHA MANZIL, KACHERI ROAD, PUZHAVATHU, CHANGANACHERRY. GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 25312 of 2010 ================== Dated this the 12th day of August, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioners challenge Ext.P7 order of th Government passed pursuant to a direction issued by this Court in Ext.P5 judgment. The dispute is regarding a piece of property, which the 5th respondent claims to be puramboke land, through which, she has a right of way. The petitioners claim that the same is their property and not puramboke. By Ext.P7 order, the Government found that the property in question is puramboke land used as a pathway and, therefore, the petitioners are liable to vacate the same. On a perusal of Ext.P7, I do not find any infirmity in the same, wherein detailed reasons are given for the conclusion arrived at. As such, I am not inclined to entertain the challenge against Ext.P7. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. However, this will not stand in the way of the petitioners filing a suit for declaration of title in respect of the property, if so advised. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge 2