IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 4TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 13TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 29509 of 2011(K) ------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ N.VINODKUMAR, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.RAGHAVAN NAMBIAR, RESIDING AT MOOLAKANDAM, AJANUR VILLAGE, HOSDURG, KASARGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SURESH KUMAR KODOTH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, HOSDURG-671 123. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KASARGOD-671 121. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, AJANUR VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK-671 123. 4. THE COMMISSIONER, LAND REVENUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.MOHAMMED SHAH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss W.P.(C) NO.29509/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1- TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTERED SALE DEED NO.831/2007 OF SRO, HOSDURG EXECUTED BY ONE NAMA GANESHAN AND 6 OTHERS. EXHIBIT P2- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.LCR 6/2009(1) DATED 7.1.2011 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3- TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM IN A.1374/2011. EXHIBIT P4- TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION DATD 17.2.2011. EXHIBIT P5- TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 23.3.2011. EXHIBIT P6- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.8.2011. EXHIBIT P7- TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION. EXHIBIT P8- TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM STAY APPLICATION DATED 4.10.2011. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS NIL:- TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE tss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ---------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 29509 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T Proceedings under the Land Conservancy Act were initiated against the petitioner resulting in Ext.P2 order of the first respondent in an appeal filed by the petitioner. This order was confirmed by the 2nd respondent as per Ext.P6. Aggrieved by Ext.P6 the petitioner has filed Ext.P7 revision and Ext.P8 stay petition which are said to be pending before the 4th respondent. 2. During the pendency of the revision and the stay petition, petitioner apprehends that Ext.P2 order will be implemented. Therefore the writ petition is filed. 3. From the facts pleaded in this petition it is clear that Ext.P7 statutory revision filed invoking the provisions of the Kerala Land Conservancy Act is pending consideration of the 4th respondent. Therefore I think it is premature to implement Ext.P2 order. W.P.(C) No. 29509 OF 2011 :2 : Therefore I dispose of the writ petition with the following directions. 4. That the 4th respondent will consider and pass orders on Ext.P7 revision filed by the petitioner against Exts.P2 and P6 orders. This shall be done with notice to the petitioner and as expeditiously as possible at any rate within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 5. It is directed that in the meanwhile further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P2 and P6 will be kept in abeyance. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the Writ Petition before respondents 1, 3 and 4 for compliance. Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE ul/- [true copy] P.S. to Judge