IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 19TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 30TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 5800 of 2008(M) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER: ---------------------- REMANI, W/O.SASIDHARAN, AGED 51 YEARS, PALLIKANDATH VEEDU, KADUTHIRUTHY, KINASSERI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 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 GP. SRI.I.V. PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------- W.P.(C)No.5800 OF 2008 ----------------------------- DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner submits that she had made an application to the 2nd respondent as contemplated under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order for conversion of 80 cents of land. It is stated that in view of Exhibit P3 communication issued by the 1st respondent, the 2nd respondent is not considering the application, for the reason that in Exhibit P3, the first respondent has stated that it is proposed to introduce a legislation governing the reclamation of paddy fields etc. Therefore a direction has been issued that pending introduction of that legislation, the request made in terms of the provisions of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order shall not be entertained. 2. I do not find any justification in Exhibit P3. Until any legislation modifying the provisions of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order is brought into force, the 2nd respondent is bound to consider any application that is made in terms of provisions of the Land Utilisation Order. Since in view of Exhibit P3, the application made by the petitioner has not been considered, I direct the 2nd respondent to take up the application made by the petitioner, consider the same and pass appropriate orders in the matter. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within eight weeks from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE. dsn