IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 13TH OCTOBER 2011 / 21ST ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 27012 of 2011(B) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- SREENIVASAN, S/O. KUNHIMON, MUCHIRIPARAMBIL HOUSE, MUNDOOR P.O., THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY (REVENUE), SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PALAYAM. P.O. - 695001 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, AYANTHOLE.P.O., THRISSUR – 680003. 3. THE GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIAL CENTRE, AYYANTHOLE.P.O., THRISSUR – 680003. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. M.J. RAJASHREE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: STU WP(C).No. 27012 of 2011(B) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 : COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED UNDER SEC. 9(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, DTD 09/07/2007. P2 : COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD 03/02/2011. P3 : COPY OF THE LETTER SEND BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DTD 30/03/2011. P4 : COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD 23/11/2010. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY/ P.A TO JUDGE STU ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 27012 of 2011 B ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 13th day of October, 2011 J U D G M E N T ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Prayer sought in the writ petition is for a direction to consider Ext.P4 representation made by the petitioner before the second respondent. 2. Although it is not so mentioned in the representation, according to the petitioner, Ext.P4 representation was made under Section 5 of the Land Conservancy Act. Section 5 says that any application made under the Land Conservancy Act should be in the appropriate form prescribed under the Act. Since Ext.P4 is only a representation, it cannot be ordered to be considered and, therefore, leaving it open to the petitioner to move the appropriate authority under the Act with an application in the appropriate form, this writ petition is closed. Sd/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks/13/10 // True Copy // P.A. To Judge