IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 8TH APRIL 2008 / 19TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 11938 of 2008(U) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ---------------------- V.M.RADHAKRISHNAN, 18/714,S/O. P.VELAYUDHAN NAIR, AGED 49 EYARS, "NINEETITA" D.P.O. ROAD, 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. I.V. PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/04/2008 ALONG WITH WPC.NO.11964 OF 2008 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C) 11938, 11964, 11979, 11994, 11995, 11996, 12080 & 12081 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated: APRIL 8, 2008 JUDGMENT In these writ petitions, the complaint of the petitioners is that the 2nd respondent is declining to accept Ext.P1 application under the provisions of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order acting upon Ext.P2, a communication issued by the 1st respondent. 2. According to the 1st respondent, in view of the proposal to modify the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, applications in the nature of Ext.P1 shall not be considered and it is on that basis the 2nd respondent is declining to entertain Ext.P1. 3. In my view, there is absolutely no justification for the stand taken by the 2nd respondent in declining to accept Ext.P1 in these cases. So long as the Kerala Land Utilisation Order remains in the statute book, the notified authority viz. the 2nd respondent is bound to accept the applications made under the said order and pass orders thereon. A proposal for a legislation for any modification to WP(C)11938, 11964, 11979, 11994, 11995, 11996, 12080 & 12081 of 2008 Page numbers the Kerala Land Utilisation Order cannot be a reason at this stage to decline to entertain the applications. 4. Therefore, I dispose of these writ petitions directing that it will be open to the petitioners to present Ext.P1 applications in these cases to the 2nd respondent, in which case, the 2nd respondent shall consider the said applications and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law. Petitioners shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the 2nd respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE mt/-