IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH JUNE 2010 / 19TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 17756 of 2010(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- UNNIKRISHNAN, AMBELIPPADAM HOUSE, POONITHURA VILLAGE, PONNURUNNI DESOM, NOW RESIDING AT VADAKKAKATH HOUSE, VAZHAKKALA VILLAGE, THUTHIYOOR P.O. BY ADVS. SRI.DINESH R.SHENOY SRI.G.HARIKRISHNAN (TRIPUNITHURA) SRI.MAHESH MENON RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE TAHSILDAR, O/O THE TAHSILDAR, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VILLAGE OFFICE, VAZHAKKALA VILLAGE, VAZHAKKALA P.O. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.N. SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: shg/ S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 17756 of 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 9th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner claims to have purchased a property which was originally assigned in favour of the original owner by the Government under the Kerala Land Assignment Rules. In accordance with the sale deed so obtained in his favour, the petitioner applied for mutation. But the petitioner's application is not being considered on the ground that as per a recent amendment to the Kerala Land Assignment Rules, there is a bar on alienation of land assigned under the Kerala Land Assignment Rules, for a period of 25 years. According to the petitioner, that amendment is only prospective and therefore the assignment in question which took place in 1977 as evidenced by Ext.P5 would not be affected by the said amendment. Consequently there is no reason for the 1st respondent to deny mutation to the petitioner's property is the contention raised. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. A learned Judge of this court has already held that the amendment in question is only prospective in nature and would apply only to assignments made after the amendment. In fact the Government has also issued a clarification to that effect. In view of the same, there cannot be any impediment for the 1st respondent to consider the application for mutation, if otherwise the same is in order. Accordingly this writ petition is dispose of with a direction to the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's application for mutation in accordance with law, if the same is in order in all other respects. The same shall be done within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE shg/