IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 13TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 22ND KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 32601 of 2009(U) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- DEVASSY,S/O.ITTIRAH, AGED 50, PADAYATTIYIL HOUSE, NAYATHODU P.O., ANGAMALY ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.K.B.PRADEEP RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, KAKKANADU, ERNAKULAM. 4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA KALADY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 5. ANGAMALY MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ANGAMALY P.O.,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. R1 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss P.N.RAVINDRAN,J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.32601 of 2009 - U ---------------------------------------- Dated 18th November, 2009 Judgment Aggrieved by Ext.P1 notice issued by the fourth respondent, the petitioner filed an appeal before the District Collector, Ernakulam. By Ext.P9 order passed on 22.10.2009, the District Collector upheld Ext.P1. The District Collector however noticed that as the petitioner does not have a place of residence, if he is evicted from the temporary shed, he will be put to serious prejudice. The District Collector accordingly observed that if the petitioner submits an application before the local authority for allotment of a house under the Housing Scheme, his case should be sympathetically considered. In this writ petition, the petitioner challenges Exts.P1 and P9 orders. The petitioner submits that though under section 16 (4) of the Kerala Land Conservancy Act a revision petition lies to the Land Revenue Commissioner, even before the period of limitation prescribed for filing the revision petition expired, Ext.P11 notice was issued on 4.11.2009 calling upon him to vacate the W.P.(C) No.32601/2009 2 building within seven days from the date of receipt of the notice. 2. Section 16 (4) of the Keralal Land Conservancy Act entitled the petitioner to file a revision petition before the Land Revenue Commissioner challenging Ext.P9 order. Ext.P9 order was passed only on 22.10.2009. The period of limitation prescribed for filing an appeal had not expired when Ext.P11 notice was issued. The revisional authority is also empowered to condone the delay in filing the revision if sufficient cause is shown for not filing the revision in time. The remedy available to the petitioner by way of revision should not in my opinion, be rendered meaningless and illusory in view of the facts noticed by the District Collector in Ext.P9 order. Ext.P9 order discloses that the petitioner is a landless person without any place to reside. The District Collector has in Ext.P9 order observed that his case merits sympathetic consideration at the hands of the local authority. In such circumstances, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction that further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P1 notice issued by the fourth respondent, Ext.P9 order passed by the W.P.(C) No.32601/2009 3 District Collector, Ernakulam and Ext.P11 notice issued by the fourth respondent shall be kept in abeyance for a period of one month from today in order to enable the petitioner to move the Land Revenue Commissioner by filing a revision petition challenging Exts.P1 and P9 orders and seeking interim orders staying the operation of the said orders pending disposal of the revision. I hope and trust that the Land Revenue Commissioner will not render the revisional remedy meaningless and illusory by declining an order of stay, having regard to the observations made by the District Collector in Ext.P9. The contentions of the petitioner on the merits are kept open. The Land Revenue Commissioner shall in the event of the petitioner filing a revision petition dispose of the same expeditiously, after affording him a reasonable opportunity of being heard. P.N.RAVINDRAN Judge mrcs