IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 20TH AUGUST 2010 / 29TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).NO. 26707 OF 2010(O) ----------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN CC 507/1973 IN CC.506/1973 OF TALUK LAND BOARD, OTTAPALAM .................... PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- P.V.KUNCHUNNI NAIR, PARATHIKKATTE VEETHO TTUR NAIR HOUSE, ARANGOTTUKARA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT ,KERALA. BY ADV. SRI.B.PREMNATH (E) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE TALUK LAND BOARD, OTTAPPALAM, PALAKKAD. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, OTTAPPALAM, PALAKKAD. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== W.P(C) No.26707 of 2010 ==================================== Dated this the 20th day of August, 2010 J U D G M E N T Heard learned counsel for petitioner and Government Pleader who took notice for respondents. Issue regarding land to be surrendered as excess land stands concluded as per Ext.P1, order dated 23.03.2010 in C.R.P. No.1094 of 2000. Learned counsel states that Ext.P1, order is under challenge in the Supreme Court and that matter is likely to come up before the Supreme Court within two weeks. In the mean time without prejudice to the contentions petitioner has raised in the Special Leave Petition he filed Ext.P2, application before Revenue Divisional Officer, Ottapalam (who, I am told is the Chairman of Taluk Land Board, Ottapalam) requesting to permit petitioner to exercise option under Section 85(2) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act. That petition was received by the Revenue Divisional Officer on 25.05.2010 at 2.25 p.m., as the endorsement on Ext.P2 shows. Petitioner states that no action has been taken on Ext.P2. But in the meantime respondents are trying to take possession of the excess land pursuant to Ext.P1. Petitioner seeks a direction to the W.P(C) No.26707 of 2010 -: 2 :- respondents to keep in abeyance further proceeding pursuant to Ext.P1 for some time so that in the meantime Ext.P2, application can be disposed of or appropriate orders can be obtained from the Supreme Court. Having regard to the circumstances of the case which I have stated it is only just and proper that respondents are directed to keep in abeyance further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P1 for some time or till Supreme Court passes appropriate orders in the pending Special Leave Petition whichever is earlier. Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondents to keep in abeyance further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P1, order dated 23.03.2010 in C.R.P. No.1094 of 2000 for a period of two weeks from this day or till the Supreme Court passes appropriate orders in the Special Leave Petition filed by petitioner, whichever is earlier. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv