IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 10TH APRIL 2008 / 21ST CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 12456 of 2008(G) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- ABDU RAHIMAN KUTTY, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O. MOIDEEN HAJI, MACHINGAL HOUSE, A.R.NAGAR, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.A.T.ANILKUMAR RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SECRETARY TO REVENUE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM. 3. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER , THIRUR. 4. TAHASILDAR, THIRUR ANGADI. 5. VILLAGE OFFICER, NEDUVA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.I.V.PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ====================================== WRIT PETITION NO. 12456 OF 2008 ====================================== Dated this the 10th day of April 2008 JUDGMENT By submitting Ext.P1, petitioner sought permission for conversion of the land in terms of the provisions contained in Kerala Land Utilization Act. Delay in passing orders on Ext.P1 is the complaint in this writ petition. Now that Ext.P1 has been filed by the petitioner, it is for the third respondent to consider and pass orders thereon. 2. Petitioner relies on Ext.P6 and claims for parity in treatment. Since I have directed the third respondent to pass orders on Ext.P1, it is for the third respondent to take into account Ext.P6 also, while Ext.P1 application is considered. 3. Accordingly, the writ petition will stand disposed of directing that the third respondent shall pass orders on Ext.P1, in the manner indicated above, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within six weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the third respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE css/ css/