IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 19TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 30TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 22290 of 2006(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- A.B. KRISHNADAS, S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, AGED 53 YEARS, KADUNGATH KALAM, EZHAKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER (R.D.O), PALAKKAD. 3. BHASKARAN, S/O. KESAVAN, KIZHAKKEPPURA, VILAYANNUR P.O., VILAYANCHATHANNUR, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER (R.D.O.), PALAKKAD. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MUNDUR-II VILLAGE, PALAKKAD. 5. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KONGAD POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 6. A.B. SIVADAS, S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, KADUNGATH KALAM, EZHAKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.VINOD KUMAR.C FOR R6 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.22290/06 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE IN RESPECT OF THE PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX PAID RECEIPT IN RESPECT OF THE PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14.7.06 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT AGAINST THE PETITIONER DIRECTING IMMEDIATE STOPPAGE OF THE RUBBER CULTIVATION. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NO. 22290 OF 2006 C ==================== Dated this the 19th day of February, 2008 J U D G M E N T The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P3. By Ext.P3, proceedings were initiated against the petitioner on the allegation that he has violated the provisions of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order. According to the petitioner, the land is a rubber plantation and that the Kerala Land Utilisation Order has no application. At the stage when this writ petition was admitted, this court had passed an interim order to maintain status quo and that order continues even now. It was also ordered that the petitioner shall not start any new cultivation. 2. As already noticed, what is under challenge is only a notice and in my view if the petitioner has any objection to the proposal in Ext.P3, it is for him to file his objections and thereafter it is for the 2nd respondent to finalise the proceedings with notice to the petitioner and others. 3. In view of this, I dispose of this writ petition itself WPC 22290/06 :2 : directing that it will be open to the petitioner to file his objections to Ext.P3, which he shall do within three weeks from today. Once objections is filed as above, the 2nd respondent shall finalise the proceedings with notice to all concerned, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within four weeks thereafter. In the meantime, the interim order dated 21.08.2006 shall remain in force. Petitioner is directed to produce copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent for compliance. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC,JUDGE. Rp