IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2010 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 30507 of 2010(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- S.RAJENDRAN, S/O.S.SHANMUGHAVAL, AGED 46, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.492/10, IKKA BHAVAN, IKKA NAGAR, KDH VILLAGE, MUNNAR P.O., PIN-685 612. BY ADV. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR SRI.P.MARTIN JOSE SRI.P.PRIJITH SMT.HANI P.NAIR SRI.M.K.THANKAPPAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, DEVIKULAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P. N. SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.30507 OF 2010(K) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of October, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner submits that by Ext.P1 order of assignment, 8 cents of land in KDH Village was ordered to be assigned to the petitioner. It is stated that in pursuance to Ext.P1, Ext.P3 patta was issued. According to the petitioner, the survey number in both Exts.P1 and Ext.P3 was mistakenly shown as 843A instead of 912. 2. It is stated that thereupon, petitioner submitted Ext.P4 representation to the 2nd respondent seeking correction of the aforesaid mistake. Petitioner states that although the 2nd respondent got the complaint enquired into through the 3rd respondent who also submitted Ext.P5 report confirming the case of the petitioner and despite Ext.P6 reminder, the 2nd respondent has not passed final orders on Ext.P4. It is complaining of delay on the part of the second respondent in the matter that this writ petition is filed. 3. In the nature of the grievance that is highlighted, all that is necessary is to direct the 2nd respondent to pass orders on WPC.No. 30507/2010 :2 : Ext.P4, in the light of the materials available. 4. Therefore, without expressing anything on the merits of the claim raised, I direct the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 application made by the petitioner in the light of the materials available. This the 2nd respondent shall do as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 6 weeks from the date of production of a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition. Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/