IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 22ND JANUARY 2009 / 2ND MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 2362 of 2009(F) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- REVATHY, AGED 24 YEARS, D/O.MOHANAN, GOVINDALAYAM, K.R.PURAM, CHENNOM PALLIPURAM, CHERTHALA, BY ADV. SRI.G.P.SHINOD SRI.RAM MOHAN.G. SRI.MANU V. RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA. 2. THE TAHASILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, CHERTHALA. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,PALLIPURAM, CHERTHALA. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.N.SUDHA DEVI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P(C).No. 2362 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner submits that he got title over 72 cents of land covered by Ext.P1 sale deed. It is stated that thereupon he filed Ext.P2 application for effecting mutation of the property in his name. Complaint in this writ petition is that though Ext.P2 was filed by the petitioner as early as in 2004, the 2nd respondent has not passed any order on Ext.P2. It is complaining of the delay in considering Ext.P2, the writ petition is filed. 2. If as stated by the petitioner Ext.P2 has been received and is pending before the 2nd respondent, there is no reason to justify the delay that is caused. 3. Therefore, I direct the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P2 as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within 6 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment provided Ext.P2 has been received and is pending. 4. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a W.P.C.No. 2362 OF 2009 -:2:- copy of this writ petition before the 2nd respondent for compliance. Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) ttb