IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 23RD MARCH 2010 / 2ND CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 5150 of 2010(P) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- 1. NARAYANAN,S/O.KRISHNAN,CHALARIYIL HOUSE, MANKULAM VILLAGE,IDUKKI DISTRICT. 2. P.RAJAN,S/O/PONNUSWAMY,THEVARKATTIL, PIPELINE,PALLIVASAL VILLAGE,IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN SRI.T.R.SADEESAN SRI.A.HAROON RASHEED RESPONDENT: --------------- THE TAHSLIDAR, DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY GOVT.PLEADER SHRI P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ---------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.5150 OF 2010 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 23rd DAY OF MARCH, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioners have approached this Court seeking for the benefit of Exhibit P4 judgment. 1st petitioner is the owner of one hectare of land in survey No.77/1 of Mankulam Village covered by the Patta No.LA 27/97 issued on 19.12.1997. He filed an application on 1.6.2008 seeking permission for cutting and removing 12 damaged trees in the property after paying seignorage at the rate at the time of assignment. The 2nd petitioner is the owner of six acres of land as per patta Nos.LA.74/93 and 74/93. His application is in respect of 19 trees. 2. Earlier, the 1st petitioner and another had approached this Court by filing W.P.(C)No.33380/09 which was disposed of by Exhibit P1 judgment directing the respondent to dispose of the application. The complaint raised by the petitioners herein is that the respondent is proceeding to fix the seignorage rate at the prevailing rate as evident from Exhibits P2 and P3. The W.P.(C)No.5150/10 -2- petitioners point out that going by Exhibit P4 judgment, they can fix only the rate prevailing at the time of assignment of the land. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. It is pointed out that Exhibit P4 judgment was rendered on the peculiar facts and circumstances of the said case and it may not have any application in the case of the petitioners. 4. There is already a direction in Exhibit P1 judgment to pass final orders on Exhibits P2 and P3. Therefore, there will be a direction to the respondents to finalise the action in respect of the applications of the petitioners and communicate the result to the petitioners within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioners. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE dsn