IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 28TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 34025 of 2008(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. PATHU, W/O. ADBULLA, THATTAYATT HOUSE, KANCHIKARA DESOM, NADERI P.O., KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE. 2. KUNHAMI, D/O. MOIDEEN, PUTHIYEDATH HOUSE, KANCHIKARA DESOM, NADERI, KOYILANDY KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SR.) SRI.S.SUJIN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. TALUK LAND BOARD, KOYILANDY. 2. TAHSILDAR, KOYILANDY. 3. VILLAGE OFFICER, KOYILANDY VILLAGE, KOYILANDY. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GP SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).34025/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 19th day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioners have filed claim petitions before the Taluk Land Board, Koyilandy, in Ceiling Case No.TLB (Q) 182/77. According to them, their claim is now entitled to be considered in terms of Section 7E of the Land Reforms Act. One aspect which might arise for consideration, according to the petitioners, is whether they are in possession of the property which was scheduled to the statement filed before the Taluk Land Board in the Ceiling proceedings. Petitioners have a grievance that though the properties are still in their possession, it was recorded by the Taluk Land Board that the same had already been taken over. They have sought for appointment of an Advocate Commission and later sought for a local inspection by the Chairman and Members of the Taluk Land Board. Writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to consider the application for local inspection by the Chairman and Members of the Taluk W.P.(C).34025/2008 2 Land Board before final orders are passed on the claim petitions. 2. It is obviously open to the petitioners to pursue such applications and if it is either considered or rejected on untenable reasons, it is always open to them to challenge the correctness of the said interlocutory orders also, in the course of challenging final orders that may be passed by the Taluk Land Board on the claim petitions. This Court would be reluctant to consider each and every interlocutory petition which is pending before the Taluk Land Board. Subject to the above clarification, writ petition is disposed of. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs