IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 13TH OCTOBER 2008 / 21ST ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 29377 of 2008(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ROY CHARLES, S/O. LATE CHARLIE, PANIKKASSERY HOUSE, CHITTOOR ROAD, KOCHI - 682 018. BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE (A) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 4. KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, HOUSING BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., HUDCO BHAVAN, INDIA HABITAT CENTRE, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI - 110 003, REPRESENTED BUY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAING DIRECTOR. BY GP SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH SC SRI.A.JAYASANKAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).29377/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 13th day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner claims to be one of the co-owners of the property having an extent of 1.43 Acres of land comprised in survey No.229 in Ernakulam District. According to the petitioner, his predecessor had obtained the said land on a grant made by the erstwhile State of Kochi, as evidenced by Ext.P1 Pattayam stated to have been issued by the Diwan Peshkar on 30.8.1942. Property was later leased out to M/s.Burmah Shell Oil Company and the Company had been in possession of the property along with another 23 Acres of Government land. BPCL, which is the successor of the Burmah Shell Oil Company continued in possession of the property, but later shut down its Plant surrendering the land to the Government. The land so surrendered included 1 Acre 43 cents. Petitioner submits that even before BPCL has surrendered the property, petitioner had made a correspondence with BPCL for getting back the W.P.(C).29377/2008 2 property over which he registered a claim. He had earlier approached this Court in Writ Petition No. 13038/2008 seeking appropriate relief by way of a direction to the Government. By Ext.P4 judgment, this Court ordered as follows:- In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3 as expeditiously as possible at any rate within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to all concerned. It would be open to the petitioner to place all such documents which according to him would support his contentions, which shall be considered by the Government. The petitioner shall forward a certified copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition to the 1st respondent for compliance. But I make it clear that I have not considered any of the contentions of the petitioner on merit W.P.(C).29377/2008 3 and it is open to the Government to consider all issues involved in the matter independently including the questions as to, even if originally the land belonged to the petitioner’s father, the petitioner can at this point of time claim any right over the property, and whether there was any lease in respect of the property executed by the petitioner or his predecessor in interest at all.” 2. The time frame fixed by this Court in Ext.P4 judgment is yet to expire. Immediate apprehension of the petitioner is that there is now a proposal on the part of the Government to make available the property to the fifth respondent for a joint venture between fourth and fifth respondents. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court has already issued a direction to the Government to look into the petitioner’s claim and if that be so, it is only appropriate that the physical status of the land should be retained till the Government takes a decision. W.P.(C).29377/2008 4 3. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.Dandapani, Mr.Manu Govind, learned Standing Counsel for the fourth respondent, and the learned Government Pleader, Mr.P.N.Santhosh. 4. Considering the directions issued by this Court in Ext.P4 judgment, it is appropriate that the physical status of the land obtaining as on date may not be changed till the Government takes a decision, as already directed in Ext.P4. It is accordingly ordered . Writ petition is disposed of as above. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs