IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS TUESDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2009 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1930 WA.No. 305 of 2009() -------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN WPC 19507/08 DT.15.12.2008 APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ MEENA ASHOKAN, CHARANGATTU HOUSE, KANICHUKULANGARA.P.O, CHERTHALA. BY ADV. SRI.VIVEK VARGHESE P.J. RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLELCTORATE, ALAPPUZHA. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, CHERTHALA. 4. C.S. SWAMINATHAN, CHALLIYIL, KANICHUKULANGARA.P.O, CHERTHALA. R1 TO 3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMR. R. BINDU ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR FOR R4 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.A.No. 305 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The appellant challenges the interim order dated 15.2.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.C.No. 19507 of 2008. 2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant, the learned Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 3 and the learned counsel for the 4th respondent, the auction purchaser of the property. The only grievance pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellant is that, though she was not present in Court, the impugned interim order would show that the appellant appeared in person before this Court and this Court heard her arguments before passing the interim order. The appellant submits that her counsel relinquished her Vakalath and before she could make alternative arrangement for conducting the case, W.A.No. 305 of 2009 2 the matter came up before the Bench and the impugned order was passed. Now the appellant/petitioner has engaged a new counsel. 2. The appellant may move for early hearing or for other appropriate reliefs before the learned Single Judge. The disability suffered by her, because of the order passed by the learned Single Judge on 15.12.2008 in her absence, can also be brought to the notice of the learned Judge and appropriate reliefs can be sought. The learned Judge may consider early hearing of the Writ Petition, if motion for the same is made. 3. With the above observations this Writ Appeal is closed. (K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR) Judge (M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS) Judge tm