IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2008 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 4909 of 2008(H) ------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SADEEKH A.E.,S/O.EBRAHIM,AGED 30 YEARS AYATHU HOUSE,NELLIKUZHY VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER JOSEPH RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,REVENUE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT,TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KAKKANADU, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER MUVATTUPUZHA. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, KOTHAMANGALAM. 5. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,THRIKKARIYUR VILLAGE KOTHAMANGALAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.4909/02008 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS EXT.P1:- COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.6068/07 OF KOTHAMANGALAM S.R.O. DT. 17.8.07. EXT.P2:- COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR MUTATION DT. 17.8.07. EXT.P3:- COPY OF THE APPLICATION DT. NIL BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P3:- COPY OF THE REPORT DT. 14.11.07 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P5:- COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 11.12.07 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ P.S. TO JUDGE tss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C) 4909 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated: MARCH 17, 2008 JUDGMENT The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P5, by which an application made by the petitioner by Ext.P2 for effecting mutation of the properties on the strength of Ext.P1 document of title has been rejected. Reasons stated in Ext.P5 are that the petitioner's transferor was issued a notice under the provisions of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order and that a case is pending in this court regarding the non-implementation of the Land Utilisation Order. 2. In my view, both reasons stated in Ext.P5 cannot justify the rejection of Ext.P2 application. Irrespective of the notice that was issued to the transferor of the petitioner and the pendency of the case referred to above, if the petitioner is the rightful owner of the property, he is entitled to have the land mutated in his name. In the proceedings pertaining to the land in question, if orders are passed with notice to the petitioner, necessarily the petitioner will be bound WP(C) 4909 of 2008 Page numbers by any such order. But for that reason, the mutation need not be delayed. 3. Accordingly this writ petition is disposed of quashing Ext.P5 and directing that the 3rd respondent shall consider and pass orders on Ext.P2 application filed by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 3rd respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE mt/-