IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 14TH MARCH 2008 / 24TH PHALGUNA 1929 OP.No. 19609 of 2001(H) ---------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. M.S. KUMARI, REVATHI, T.C. 13/2152, KANNAMOLA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. A.R. RAFI, RAHIM MANZIL, THEKKETHIL KADAMUKKU, KANIYAPURAM.P.O. 3. A.R. HARIS, RAHIM MANZIL, THEKKETHIL KADAMUKKU, KANIYAPURAM.P.O. BY ADV. SRI.M.BALAGOVINDAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, LOCAL ADMINISTRATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CORPORATION BUILDING, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. N. SUDHA DEVI, ADV. SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON,SC,TVM CORPN. THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/03/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON C.M.P. NO. 31809/2001 IN O.P. NO. 19609/2001-H DISMISSED 14/03/2008. SD/- T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE SALE DEED IN SY. NO. 2641/3 OF VANCHIYOOR VILLAGE DTD. 29/01/2001. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE REFERENCE SLIP FROM THE R.2. DTD. 18/04/2001. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE CHELAN RECEIPT OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CRPN. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO. R35/18379/01 FROM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CORPORATION. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P. NO. 15674/2001 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// prv. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ======================= O.P.No.19609 of 2001-H. ======================= Dated this the 14th day of March, 2008. J U D G M E N T The first petitioner was the owner and in possession of two cents of land and a building therein having old TC.14/2366 and 2367. That was sold to petitioners 2 and 3 jointly for a valid consideration of three lakhs in the year 1999 as per Ext.P1. Subsequently they moved an application to change the name of ownership to the Corporation. The Corporation issued Ext.P4 notice directing the petitioner to produce various documents to prove that the construction is authorised. It appears that there were proceedings against the parties for demolition of unauthorised construction but ultimately they approached this Court by filing OP.No.15674/2001. By Ext.P5 judgment this Court directed the first respondent to dispose of Ext.P5 appeal therein within three months from the date of receipt of a copy the O.P.No.19609 of 2001-H. -: 2 :- judgment. Thereafter the petitioner approached the Corporation to effect the change of ownership complaining that there is unreasonable delay in the matter. 2. The main prayer is to quash Ext.P4 which was issued by the Revenue Officer of the Corporation. In the light of the direction contained in Ext.P5 judgment, I find that no fresh directions are necessary. If the appeal is still pending, the competent among the respondents will dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible. With the above observation, this writ petition is disposed of. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. kvs/-