IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH MARCH 2011 / 9TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 10153 of 2011(T) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ SUDHAKARAN.C.R, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O. RAGHAVAN, THUSHARAM, NJAKKANAL.P.O, KRISHNAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.B.HARISH KUMAR RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONERATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTOATE, KOLLAM -691 001. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, OFFICE OF REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KOLLAM - 691 001. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, KARUNAGAPALLY TALUK, KARUNAGAPALLY - 690 518. 5. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, OACHIRA VILLAGE, OACHIRA - 690 526. 6. SURENDRAN, ANAYADI, KANNIMEL, MEMANA, OACHIRA.P.O, KOLLAM - 690 526. R1 TO R5 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.N. SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.10153 OF 2011 -------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of March 2011 JUDGMENT The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue projected in the Writ Petition with regard to the actual nature of the land in question has not been correctly decided by the concerned authority. The learned counsel submits that the land is actually a 'purayidom' and not a 'paddy land', though it has been described as a 'nilam' in the revenue records. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that, Ext.P8 appeal preferred against the impugned order is still pending consideration before the 2nd respondent, simultaneously adding that the issue is squarely covered by the decision rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in “Praveen v Land Revenue Commissioner” (2010(2) Page 617) holding that decision has to be arrived at with reference to the actual/physical nature of the land in question and not merely referring to the entries made in the revenue records. 2. Heard the learned Govt. Pleader as well. 3. In the above circumstances, the 2nd respondent is directed to consider Ext.P8 appeal and pass appropriate order in W.P.(C) No. 10153/2011 - 2 - accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and in the light of the aforesaid verdict, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 'two months' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 4. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the Writ Petition before the 2nd respondent for taking further steps. Writ Petition is disposed of. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE vdv