IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 12TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 23RD MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 4637 of 2009(B) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. SRI.KRISHNANKUTTY.T.R., S/O.RAMAN, AGED 69 YEARS, THEEPOOZHIKKUNNEL (THEVARKUZHIYIL) HOUSE, CHALLAKONAM KARA, KANJIKUZHI VILLAGE, CHELACHUVADU, THODUPUZHA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 2. SMT.BHARGAVI, W/O.KRISHNANKUTTY, AGED 64 YEARS, THEEPOOZHIKKUNNEL (THEVARKUZHIYIL) HOUSE, CHALLAKONAM KARA, KANJIKUZHI VILLAGE, CHELACHUVADU, THODUPUZHA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.T.V.GEORGE MR.K.N.BALACHANDRA KAIMAL MR.JIMMY GEORGE (THADATHIL) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE (R) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI. 3. THE IDUKKI-KANJIKKUZHY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.190, IDUKKI, KANJIKKUZHY P.O., IDUKKI. MR.P.N.SANTHOSH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.4637 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 12th day of February, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioners submit that they owned three acres of land in Kanjikuzhi Village in Idukki District. According to the petitioners, they filed Ext.P1 application to the 2nd respondent seeking permission for the sale of one acre of land out of the three acres held by them. The petitioners also submit that by Ext.P3, the Village Officer has already granted recommendation in their favour and the 3rd respondent has also given no objection. It is stated that despite all these, orders have not been passed on Ext.P1, inspite of Ext.P7 reminder made by them. It is in these circumstances, the writ petition is filed praying for a direction to the 2nd respondent to grant permission sought for by them as per Ext.P1. 2. From the pleading it is obvious that even according to the petitioners, final orders have not been passed on Ext.P1 by the District Collector. In view of the case of the petitioners regarding the pendency of Ext.P1 before the 2nd respondent, I direct the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P1, in the light of WP(C) No.4637/2009 -2- Ext.P2 report also. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg