IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH MARCH 2008 / 29TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 9288 of 2008(E) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ 1. BRIJESHKUMAR, S/O.M.SASIKUMAR, AGED 30 YEARS, 39/290, ASARI LANE, KARIKKAMURI, KOCHI-11. 2. SASIDHARAN, S/O.KUNJANDI, PALLIKANDATH HOUSE, KADUTHIRUTHY, KINASSERI, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, REVENUE (P) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PALAKKAD. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C) 9288 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated: MARCH 19, 2008 JUDGMENT Exts.P1 and P2 are the applications made by the petitioners requesting the 2nd respondent to grant permission for conversion of the land mentioned therein in terms of the provisions contained in the Kerala Land Utilisation Order. According to the petitioners, these applications are declined to be considered on account of Ext.P3 direction issued by the 1st respondent. 2. Ext.P3 shows that in view of the proposal of the 1st respondent to introduce a legislation modifying the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, applications in the nature of Exts.P1 and P2 shall not be considered. In my view, it is clearly erroneous. So long as the Kerala Land Utilisation Order is in the statute book, applications in the nature of Exts.P1and P2 are liable to be considered by the 2nd respondent. 3. Accordingly I dispose of this writ petition directing that the 2nd respondent shall consider Exts.P1 and P2 applications WP(C) 9288/08 Page numbers irrespective of Ext.P3 direction, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within six weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE mt/-