IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2010 / 24TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 10395 of 2010(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- A.A.XAVIER, S/O.APPU, AGED 81 YEARS, AZHIKKAKATH HOUSE, THAMMANAM, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI-25. BY ADV. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA SRI.K.I.SAGEER RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, FORT KOCHI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, CHERANALLOOR VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 5. A.A.PHELIX, S/O.APPU, AZHIKKAKATH HOUSE, CHITTOOR P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 6. BOBAN, S/O.GEORGE, AZHIKKAKATH HOUSE, CHERANALLOOR P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. ADV. SMT.R.PADMAKUMARI FOR R5 SRI.P.GOPAKUMARAN NAIR SRI.C.S.DIAS SRI.N.K.SUBRAMANIAN GOVT. PLEADER SRI. M.A. ASIF. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: W.P.C. NO. 10395/2010. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DT. 20-2-2010. EXT.P2 REPRESENTATION DT. 20-2-2010. EXT.P3 POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 10395 of 2010 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 15th day of July, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner and the 5th respondent are brothers. 6th respondent is the nephew of the petitioner. The petitioner objects to the respondents 5 and 6 attempting to convert paddy land allegedly adjacent to the petitioner's paddy lands. In respect of the same, the petitioner has filed Exts.P1 and P2 complaints. The petitioner seeks a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts. P1 and P2 expeditiously. 2. This is opposed by the counsel for respondents 5 and 6. According to them, there is no reason for the petitioner to file such a complaint at all. 3. I have heard counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader and counsel for respondents 5 and 6. I am not inclined to go into the disputed questions of fact raised by the petitioner on the one hand and respondents 5 and 6 on the other, insofar as the matter is pending consideration before the 2nd respondent pursuant to Exts.P1 and P2. All what is possible now is to direct the 2nd respondent to take a decision on Exts.P1 and P2 after hearing all parties concerned. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.P1 and P2, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as well as respondents 5 and 6, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/