IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 1ST FEBRUARY 2010 / 12TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 3202 of 2010(A) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KERALA STATE WAKF BOARD, V.I.P.ROAD, KALOOR, COCHIN-682 017. 2. EDAPPALLY MUSLIM JAMA-ATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, A.M.PAREEKUTTY, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.A.P.MARACKAR, RESIDING AT ANTHROLI PARAMBIL HOUSE, EDAPPALLY NORTH P.O., COCHIN-682 024. BY ADV. SRI.M.M.SAIDU MUHAMMED RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), N.H.1, KAKKANADU. BY GP K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J ------------------- W.P.(C).3202/2010 -------------------- Dated this the 1st day of February, 2010 JUDGMENT 1. Petitioners' grievance is that pursuant to Exts.P1 to P3 judgments rendered by the Sub Court, Ernakulam, in Land Acquisition References, compensation which is to be received by the 1st petitioner should be paid to the 2nd petitioner. It is stated that by Exts.P4 to P6, applications were filed by the 1st petitioner to issue the cheque to the 2nd petitioner, the person authorized by him. On those applications, an order has been passed by the Sub Court requiring the 1st petitioner to appear in person. It is this order which is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. In my view, no fault can be found with the Court in having ordered the personal appearance of the 1st petitioner. This is all the more for the reason that in the I.A which has been filed, prayer was to make payment to a person who is allegedly authorized and that too without even giving the authorized person, a power of attorney. Therefore, I do not find any illegality in requiring the appearance of the petitioners. Writ petition is accordingly dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs