IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST APRIL 2009 / 11TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 10519 of 2009(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ SAVITHRI, W/O. BALAN, AMMAVAKASTHALATHU, MURIKKUMPADOM, AZHEEKAL.P.O, KOCHI. BY ADV. SRI.ANIL THOMAS (MELEMALAYIL) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PUTHUVYPPE VILLAGE, VYPEEN 2. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, KOCHI. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, FORT KOCHI. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 10519 OF 2009 (H) ===================== Dated this the 1st day of April, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner's grievance is that she and her husband had made applications for assignment of land and that those applications were directed to be considered in Ext.P1 judgment rendered by this Court in WP(C) No.25130/2006. It is stated that in pursuance to the judgment, orders have been passed on the application made by her husband alone and that her application has not been considered. It is with this grievance the writ petition has been filed praying that the application made by her should be ordered to be considered by the 2nd respondent. 2. Petitioner has not produced a copy of the application stated to have been made and even Exts.P2 and P3 do not make reference to such an application. However, counsel for the petitioner asserts that there was such an application, and if that be so, it will be open to the petitioner to approach the 2nd respondent, who shall verify the matter, and if application made by her is pending, necessarily, the same shall be dealt with in accordance with the rules. It is also directed that in case if no WPC 10519/09 :2 : such application is received or is traceable, it will be open to the petitioner to make a fresh application, in which event, that will also be dealt with in accordance with law. 3. The needful shall be done, as expeditiously as possible. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent for compliance. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp