IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 20TH DECEMBER 2010 / 29TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WA.No. 1952 of 2010 ------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.32582/2010 Dated 26/10/2010 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER --------------------------- ASHIQUE.B.M,S/O.MUHAMMED KUNHU, BLAYIPARAMBA,THRIKKAKARA.P.O,UNNICHIRA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SMT.T.RESMI DAMODARAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS ---------------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-30. 2. THE DIRECTOR,MINING AND GEOLOGY DEPARTMENT,KESAVADASAPURAM,TRIVANDRUM-4. BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.Chelameswar, C.J. & P.R.Ramachandra Menon, J. ------------------------------------------ W.A. No.1952 of 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 20th day of December, 2010 JUDGMENT Ramachandra Menon, J. The appellant is the unsuccessful writ petitioner who has approached this Court stating that the interference was declined by the learned Single Judge without properly appreciating the actual facts and figures. 2. During the course of hearing, it was brought to the notice of this Court that the observation made by the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment that Ext.P2 order of the District Collector was passed as early as on '20.4.2009' is not correct and that the order was passed only on 20.4.2010. It is with reference to the said misconceived fact that the order was passed as early as on 20.4.2009, an observation was made by the learned Single Judge that the matter was highly belated. It was further held that there was no challenge against Ext.P2. Accordingly, interference was declined and the writ petition was dismissed at the admission stage itself, which in turn is under challenge. 3. On considering the materials on record, we find that Ext.P2 order was actually passed on '20.4.2010' and that there is a factual error in the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge and in turn, as to the W.A. No.1952 of 2010 - 2 - alleged delay on the part of the appellant/petitioner in approaching this Court. With regard to the absence of challenge against Ext.P2, it is true that no specific prayer is incorporated in the relief portion of the writ petition. But the very first ground raised in the writ petition is that 'Ext.P2 order is illegal, improper, invalid and therefore unsustainable'. In the said circumstances, we have permitted the appellant to cause the writ petition to be amended and accordingly, I.A.No.933 of 2010 filed in this regard has been allowed as per order dated 24th November, 2010. 4. In the above facts and circumstances, we find that the matter requires to be considered on merits by the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned judgment. The Registry is directed to post the writ petition for consideration before appropriate Court. The appellant/writ petitioner shall produce copy of the amended writ petition before the Court concerned. J.Chelameswar, Chief Justice P.R.Ramachandra Menon, Judge vns