IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 16TH OCTOBER 2008 / 24TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 30402 of 2008(T) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- SR.ANCY THENAMMAKKAL, MOTHER SUPERIOR, ADORATION CONVENT, KALIYAR POST, VANNAPURAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW JOHN (K) SRI.AJEESH K.SASI RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, IDUKKI. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DIST. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VANNAPURAM, THODUPUZHA,IDUKKI DIST. 4. SAFIYA MOIDU KUNIYIL HOUSE, KALIYAR POST, VANNAPURAM VILLAGE , IDUKKI DISTRICT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH FOR R1 TO R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Rs/ V. GIRI, J. ------------------------------- WP(C).NO. 30402 of 2008 --------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of October , 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioner challenges Ext.P4 proceedings issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer purportedly under the Land Utilisation Order requiring the petitioner to restore certain lands which are alleged to be paddy lands. Detailed objections have been filed by the petitioner as Ext.P5. But the petitioner apprehends that the order might be implemented without looking into the objections. I am of the view that Ext.P4 is liable to be treated only as a show cause notice and if that be so, Ext.P5 is liable to be treated as objections. 2. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to look into Ext.P5 objections treating the same as objections to Ext.P4 notice, hear the petitioner and the 4th respondent and pass final orders thereon. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the first respondent. V. GIRI, JUDGE. Pmn/ WPC. /2008 2