IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2011 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 6611 of 2011(B) ------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. BHARATHAN.P.,S/O.LATE APPUTTY, AGED 78 YEARS,PEEDIKAKANDI HOUSE, P.O.KOLATHARA,KOZHIKODE. 2. NARAYANI, W/O.LATE KUMARAN, AGED 80 YEARS, PEEDIKAKANDI HOUSE, P.O.KOLATHARA, KOZHIKODE. 3. HARISH P.C.,S/O.LATE CHANDRASEKHARAN, AGED 45 YEARS, 'ANANDHALAYAM',P.O.KOLATHARA, KOZHIKODE. BY SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KOZHIKODE-673 020. 3. THE SECRETARY, OLAVANNA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, G.A.COLLEGE P.O.,KOZHIKODE-673 014. 4. V.RAVEENDRAN, VASANTHABHAVAN,KOLATHARA P.O., KOZHIKODE-673 655. *ADDL.R5 IMPLEADED: 5. THE COMMISSIONER FOR LAND REVENUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. *IS `SUO MOTU' IMPLEADED AS ADDITIONAL 5TH RESPONDENT AS PER JUDGMENT DTD. 03/03/2011 IN W.P.(C) 6611/2011. R1 & R2 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.N. SANTHOSH, THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/03/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J ........................................... WP(C).NO.6611 OF 2011 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 3rd DAY OF MARCH, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this court with the following prayers. “i)call for the records leading to Exts.P1 to P7 and peruse the same, ii) issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction quashing Ext.P4 order passed by the Commissioner of Land Revenue iii) issue writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction directing the 1st respondent to dispose of Ext.P5 revision petition, R.P.275/01 in favour of the petitioners within a period prescribed by this Hon'ble Court. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, being aggrieved of Ext.P4 order passed by the Commissioner for Land Revenue, the petitioner has approached the first respondent Government by filing Ext.P5 and that wpc 6611/2011 2 necessary direction may be given to the Government to have it considered and disposed of. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 4. Going by the materials on record, it is seen that Ext.P4 order has been passed by the Commissioner for Land Revenue, declining interference stating that the revision petition is not maintainable. However, it is pointed out that, by virtue of Rule 218 of the Kerala Land Assignment Rules, revisional jurisdiction is very much vested upon the Commissioner and as such the observation made by the Commissioner in Ext.P4 that the revision is not maintainable does not appear to be correct and the matter ought to have been considered and disposed of in accordance with the merits of the case. 5. In the above circumstances, Ext.P4 is set aside and the Commissioner is directed to reconsider the matter and pass appropriate orders on merits in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and others concerned, as expeditiously as possible, and at any rate, within `two months' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a wpc 6611/2011 3 copy of the writ petition before the Commissioner for Land Revenue. The Commissioner for Land Revenue, Thiruvananthapuram is `suo motu' impleaded as the additional 5th respondent so as to meet the requirements in the above case and the learned Government Pleader has entered appearance on behalf of the additional 5th respondent as well. Writ petition is disposed of. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE lgk