IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 7TH JUNE 2011 / 17TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 15274 of 2011(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- THE NELLIAMPATHY TEA & PRODUCE CO.LTD., REGISTERED OFFICE: P.B.NO.4260, PANAMPILLY NAGAR.P.O., COCHIN-682 036, REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT VICE PRESIDENT (HR & ADMN.), MR.GILBERT D'SOUZA. BY ADV. MR. JOSEPH KODIANTHARA, SENIOR ADVOCATE MR. MATHEWS K.UTHUPPACHAN MR. BINU MATHEW MR. TERRY V.JAMES MR. B.J.JOHN PRAKASH MR. TOM THOMAS (KAKKUZHIYIL) MR. V.ABRAHAM MARKOS RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, FOREST DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PIN-695 014. 2. THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, (CUSTODIAN-BIO-DIVERSITY ECOLOGICALLY FRAGILE LANDS), FOREST HEADQUARTERS, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014. 3. DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, NENMARA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 508. 4. THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER, NELLIAMPATHY RANGE, NENMARA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 508. R1 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. P. NARAYANAN R2 TO R4 SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. M.P. PRAKASH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P (C) No. 15274 of 2011 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 7th June , 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court mainly challenging Ext. P29, which is stated as an 'erratum notification' dated 01.03.2011 issued by the 3rd respondent and addressed to the 2nd respondent, referring to the particulars of the properties in question, in connection with the issue stated as pending consideration before the Tribunal constituted under Section 9 of the Kerala Forest (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Lands) Act, 2003. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that, the impugned proceedings have already been taken up in challenge by filing Ext. P21 appeal and the same is pending consideration before the aforesaid Tribunal and it is in the meanwhile, that the 3rd respondent has issued Ext. P29, which hence is sought to be intercepted in this writ petition. 3. Heard the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents as well, who submits that, the pleadings and prayers are not liable to be entertained, in so far Ext. P29 is not at all a notification but is only a proposal made by the 3rd respondent to the second respondent and as such, the writ petition itself is premature. W.P. (C) No. 15274 of 2011 : 2 : 4. Going by the materials on record, it is seen that, the request made by the 3rd respondent vide Ext. P29 is to take appropriate action to publish the erratum notification on the EFL, showing new boundaries based on the particulars as furnished therein. This means, the notification is still to come into existence and as such, the apprehension expressed by the petitioner with reference to the notification is not liable to be looked into by this Court, as on date. 5. However, taking note of the fact that, the statutory appeal preferred against Ext. P29 is pending consideration before the Tribunal, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the Tribunal constituted under Section 9 of the Kerala Forest (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Lands) Act, 2003 to have it considered, passing appropriate orders on Ext. P21 in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within 'three months' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. All the contentions raised by the petitioner in this writ petition are left open, making it clear that, this Court has not expressed anything on merits. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd W.P. (C) No. 15274 of 2011 : 3 : “P29” occurring in line 2 of paragraph 5 of the judgment dated 07.06.2011 in W.P.(C) No. 15274 of 2011 is corrected and substituted as “P20”, as per order dated 22.06.2011 in I.A. 9512 of 2011 in W.P.(C) 15274 of 2011 Sd/- Registrar (Judicial)