IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 14TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 23RD BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 27599 of 2010(Y) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- DEVASSYKUTTY.A.M,AGED 37 YEARS, S/O.MATHAPPAN,ACHANDIVEETTIL,MANIKAMANGALAM, P.O.THOTTAKAM-683 574. BY ADV. SRI.DINESH R.SHENOY SRI.MAHESH MENON RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,CIVIL STATION, THRISSUR-680 001. 2. SHRI.MOHANAN.V.R,VELLAPPILLY VEEDU, POOLANI,MELOOR.P.O,THRISSUR- 680 311. R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: kl. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 27599 of 2010 Y ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 14th day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T Challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P10 proceedings of the District Collector issued under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008. 2. One of the grounds of which the said order is sought to be challenged is that the order was passed without disclosing the materials that were relied on against the petitioner. In view of the said submission, by order dated 06-09-2010, learned Government Pleader was directed to get instructions. On instructions, he submits that entire material was disclosed during the course of the enquiry and the petitioner did not raise any objection and that he did not request for copies. 3. Although the counsel for the petitioner disputes the correctness of the submission made by the learned Government Pleader, having regard to the dispute that is raised and also taking into account the fact that Ext.P10 order is revisable under Section 28 of the Act, it is not necessary for this Court to entertain the challenge against Ext.P10. WPC.27599/2010 : 2 : Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition directing that it will be open to the petitioner to pursue the revisional remedy against Ext.P10. However, in order to enable the petitioner to move the authorities and seek interim orders in the matter, I direct that the status quo as on date in so far as Ext.P10 shall be kept in abeyance for six weeks from today and in the meanwhile, the petitioner shall seek the revisional remedy. Sd/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks // True Copy // P.A. To Judge