IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 19TH OCTOBER 2010 / 27TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 31874 of 2010(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- T.VENUGOPALAN, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O.LATE C.N.MADHAVANKUTTY MENON, THOYAKKATTU HOUSE, CHERUTHURUTHY P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN SRI.R.RANJITH RESPONDENT: -------------------- THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.BEJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: VK C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- W.P(C) No.31874 of 2010-H ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of October, 2010. J U D G M E N T Deceased father of the petitioner Sri.C.N.Madhavankutty Menon was working as Village Extension Officer. He died in the year 1962, while in service, leaving behind his wife and a son, the petitioner herein. The petitioner was aged only three months at that time. It is stated that the Government fixed the liability upon the petitioner's father to the tune of Rs.3001.25. According to the petitioner there was no notice issued to the legal heirs with respect to the liability. For the purpose of recovering the amount, the Government filed civil suit O.S.No.67/1965 and an ex-parte decree was passed in the suit. The immovable properties having an extent of 5.25 cents and 1.15 cents were sold pursuant to the recovery steps. When the petitioner came to know about the decree and the execution proceedings he approached the District Collector seeking re-conveyance of the land expressing willingness to pay off the amounts due. Since such request was not considered the petitioner approached this Court on an earlier occasion. W.P(C) No.33327 of 2004 filed in W.P(C) No.31874 of 2010-H 2 this regard was disposed of by this Court directing the Chief Secretary of the State Government to consider and pass orders on the representation submitted by the petitioner. But Ext.P1 order was issued by the Government rejecting the claim of the petitioner holding that going by the provisions contained in G.O (MS) No.196/96/Rev. dated 22.3.1996, application for re- conveyance of bought-in-land should be submitted within a period of two years from the date of confirmation of sale and since the petitioner has not approached the Government within the time stipulated such request could not be considered. 2. According to the petitioner, the findings contained in Ext.P1 is not factually correct and the application for re- conveyance was submitted within the period of two years stipulated in the above said Government Order, computed from the date of confirmation of sale. Under such circumstances, the petitioner submitted a review petition as evidenced from Ext.P2 before the respondent. The respondent had received it on 20.8.2010, as evidenced from Ext.P3 postal acknowledgment card. Grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent is not considering Ext.P2 review petition and rectifying the mistake. 3. Under the above mentioned circumstances, I am of the W.P(C) No.31874 of 2010-H 3 opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2 on an early basis. 4. Therefore the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P2 after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, as early as possible, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE //True Copy// P.A to Judge ab