IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH JULY 2008 / 25TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 21450 of 2008(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ KOTTYODAN MIDHUNA PRAKASH D/O. ANANDAN, AGED 24, THAYYIL HOUSE, CHERUVANCHERRY.P.O, KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.CIBI THOMAS RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, THALASSERY, KANNUR. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. I.V. PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J ============== W.P.(C).No. 21450 OF 2008 ==================== Dated this the 16th day of July, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner claims to be in possession and ownership of certain lands in Thalassery Taluk, which the petitioner purchased as per Ext.P1 document. She wants to construct a house therein. However, the petitioner realises that permission of the RDO is necessary under the Kerala Land Utlisation Order for that purpose. Petitioner's application in this regard was rejected by Ext.P2 on the ground that the Government has directed all RDOs not to accept or entertain any applications for permission to fill up paddy lands in view of the pendency of the Paddy Lands Protection Bill in the Kerala Legislative Assembly. Petitioner submits that this attitude of the 1st respondent is against law in so far as he has a duty to consider applications under the Kerala Land Utlisation Order as is presently obtaining. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. This Court has in several writ petitions held that the pendency of a Bill in the Assembly is not a ground to refuse to W.P.(C).No. 21450 OF 2008 2 accept or postpone consideration of applications under the Kerala Land Utlisation Order as it stands presently. Therefore Ext.P2 is clearly unsustainable. Accordingly, Ext.P2 is quashed. The 1st respondent is directed to reconsider the application submitted by the petitioner referred to in Ext.P2 and pass appropriate final orders in the matter as per the provisions of the Kerala Land Utlisation Order as it presently stands, without reference to the direction of the Government or the pendency of the Bill in the Assembly. The petitioner shall forward a certified copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition to the 1st respondent for compliance. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE bkn/-