IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 11TH OCTOBER 2010 / 19TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 31056 of 2010(F) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- N.V.CHANDRAN, S/O.NADUVILEDATH VELU, VADUTHALA, CHERANALLOOR, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. REVENUE DIVISION OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, FORT KOCHI-682001. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, KANAYANNUR TALUK OFFICE, ERNAKULAM-682011. 3. VILLAGE OFFICER, ERNAKULAM VILLAGE OFFICE, ERNAKULAM-682011. 4. V.GOKULAN, S/O.K.A.VAMANA PAI, GOKUL NIVAS, UNION CLUB ROAD, KOTTAYAM-686601. 5. V.GOPI, GOPI NIVAS, UNION CLUB ROAD, KOTTAYAM-686001. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 31056 of 2010 F ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 11th day of October, 2010 J U D G M E N T Challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P7 order passed by the first respondent rejecting an application made by the fourth respondent for cancellation of mutation of the property mentioned therein in favour of the fifth respondent. According to the petitioner, he too had filed an application for mutation, which also stands rejected by the same order. It is in these circumstances, this writ petition is filed. 2. In my view, since Rule 18(4) of the Transfer of Registry Rules itself provides for a revisional remedy to the petitioner, it is for the petitioner to pursue that remedy. Therefore, leaving it open to the petitioner to pursue the aforesaid alternate remedy of revision, this writ petition is disposed of. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks