T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.24945 of 2010 P ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 11th DAY OF AUGUST, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner has filed an application for correction of entries in the birth register as per Exhibit P7. The correction of entries in respect of the names of his children has been sought. Exhibit P8 shows that the same has been received by the respondent on 27.7.2010. Aggrieved by the delay in the matter, this Writ Petition has been filed. 2. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation. 3. The petitioner is relying upon various decisions of this Court in support of the plea that correction can be entered in the birth register. The learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation submitted that the same will be considered and appropriate reply will be given within a period of two weeks. 4. Therefore, there will be a direction to the respondent to consider Exhibit P7 application in accordance with the provisions of the Act and communicate the decision to the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- (T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE.) dsn IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2010 / 20TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 24945 of 2010(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- K.P.BABY, KALLUVEETTIL HOUSE, PIZHALA P.O., ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 27. BY ADV. SRI.N.NAGARESH SRI.SHAJI THOMAS PORKKATTIL SRI.BINU PAUL SRI.T.V.VINU RESPONDENT: --------------- REGISTRAR (BIRTHS AND DEATHS), CORPORATION OF COCHIN, ERNAKULAM KOCHI-11. BY STANDING COUNSEL SHRI S.RAMESH BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------ W.P(C) No.24945 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 8th day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner challenges Ext.P3 order passed by the second respondent cancelling the allotment of a site in an industrial estate for starting an industry. As per the conditions of allotment, the plot allotted should have been used for starting the industry within six months. Allotment was on 1.2.2007. For 2 ½ years the petitioner did not utilise the property for the purpose for which it was allotted. Therefore, by Ext.P3 order, the allotment was cancelled. The petitioner is challenging that order in this writ petition. The petitioner's contention is that petitioner could not start the industry within time because of circumstances beyond the control of the petitioner including the necessity of shifting of 11 K.V.line which passes by the side of the plot for which the petitioner had to incur huge expenses, which also required time. Therefore, the petitioner submits that if some more time is granted the petitioner can start the business. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, taking a lenient view, I direct the second respondent to grant the petitioner three more months' time to start the industry, for which the plot has been W.P(C) No.24945 OF 2010 2 allotted to the petitioner. In the meanwhile Ext.P3 order shall be kept in abeyance. If the petitioner starts the business within the said time Ext.P3 would stand cancelled. However, if the petitioner is unable to start the industry within the time stipulated, Ext.P3 would revive and petitioner shall surrender vacant possession of the plot to the second respondent immediately after three months unless the respondents in their discretion are prepared to grant further extension for valid reasons. The writ petition is disposed of as above. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE cms