IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2008 / 7TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 22871 of 2008(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ ALI, AGED 32, S/O.AHAMMED MUSLIYAR, NALLANGAL HOUSE, KIZHMURI, OORAKAM.P.O. BY ADV. SRI.A.T.ANILKUMAR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY REVENUE SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, THIROOR. 3. THASILDAR, THIROORANGADI TALUK. 4. VILLAGE OFFICER, OORAKAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.I.V.PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/07/2008, A/W W.P.C.NO.22882/08, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).Nos.22871 & 22882 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 29th day of July, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioners in these two writ petitions filed Ext.P5 applications (in both writ petitions) seeking permission to convert wet land into dry land under the Kerala Land Utilization Order. Their grievance in these writ petitions is that the same are not being accepted and considered by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirur, apparently on the basis of Government instructions not to accept such applications in view of the pendency of the Paddy Land Protection Bill in the Assembly. The petitioners seek a direction to the 2nd respondent to accept their applications and to process the same in accordance with the Kerala Land Utilization Order. 2. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that this is in view of the Government directions and pendency of the Bill, which according to him, has already been passed by the Assembly. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. w.p.c.22871/08 & cc. 2 4. This Court has in several writ petitions held that pendency of a Bill before the Assembly is not a ground to refuse to accept or consider applications under the Kerala Land Utilization Order as it presently stands. In fact it is reported that in the Act which has been passed by the Assembly also there is no prohibition for granting permission to convert 5 cetns in Municipal areas and 10 cents in Panchayat areas. In the above circumstances, I am satisfied that the 2nd respondent is bound to accept the originals of Ext.P5 (in both writ petitions) and to consider the same in accordance with law the law as it is presently prevailing. Accordingly, these writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the RDO, Tirur, to accept the originals of Ext.P5 (in both writ petitions), consider the same and pass orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge w.p.c.22871/08 & cc. 3