IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 6TH DECEMBER 2010 / 15TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 36321 of 2010(M) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- MALATHIAMMA, AGED 66, D/O. GOURIAMMA, VENMANATTUVEETTIL HOUSE, IRINJALAKUDA VILLAGE DESOM, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. BY ADVS. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT., REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE IRINJALAKUDA MUNICIPALITY, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, IRINJALAKUDA P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 121. 3. THE ADDL. TAHSILDAR, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK OFFICE, IRINJALAKUDA, PIN-680 121. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, IRINJALAKUDA VILLAGE OFFICE, IRINJALAKUDA P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 001. R1, R3 & R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P.N.SANTHOSH KUMAR R2 BY ADV. SRI. SAJIESH PAUL, SC FOR MUNICIPALITY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 36321 OF 2010 ===================== Dated this the 6th day of December, 2010 J U D G M E N T According to the petitioner, she along with her children have got title in respect of 10.25 cents of land in Sy.No.152/1 of Irinjalakkuda Village and another land having an extent of 30.75 cents in the very same survey number also belongs to them. It is stated that after a long drawn out legal proceedings, revenue records have been modified and the property now stands in their name. It is stated that thereafter they applied for getting the property mutated in their name and that so far final orders have not been passed by the 3rd respondent. It is complaining of delay on the part of the 3rd respondent, the writ petition is filed. 2. Irrespective of the contentions raised by the petitioner about her entitlement to get the property mutated in her favour, having regard to the fact that proceedings are still pending before the 3rd respondent and as final orders are yet to be passed, I do not think it necessary for this Court to enter into the merits of the controversy. 3. Taking note of the case of the petitioner that her WPC No. 36321/10 :2 : application for mutation is still pending before the 3rd respondent, it is directed that the 3rd respondent shall pass final orders in the matter. This the 3rd respondent shall do as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 6 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp