IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 27TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 4808 of 2011(A) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- SAITHALAVI, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.KOYUNNI, PUTHANVALAPPIL HOUSE PALLAM P.O.,DESAMANGALAM THRISSUR DIST BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR SMT.P.R.REENA RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695001 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR, PIN-680003 3. TAHSILDAR, TALAPPILLY TALUK, VADAKKANCHERY P.O.,THRISSUR DIST PIN-680582 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER ADV. MR. P. NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. W.P.(C) No. 4808 OF 2011 ......................................................................... Dated this the 16th February , 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is challenging Ext. P6 order passed by the second respondent on many a ground, particularly contending that it is beyond the jurisdiction, competence and power of the second respondent. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue is squarely covered by the decision rendered by this court in Kaipadath Property Development Co.(Pvt.)Ltd. vs. State of Kerala (2011(1) KHC 291). It is also brought to the notice of this Court that being aggrieved of Ext.P6, the petitioner has already preferred Ext.P7 revision before the Government, under Section 28 of the Conservation of Paddy and Wetland Act and that the same is still pending. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well . 3. Considering the facts and circumstances, the first respondent is directed to consider Ext. P7 revision in the light W.P.(C) No. 4808 OF 2011 2 of the decision cited supra and pass appropriate orders thereon, in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment . It is made clear the operation of Ext. P6 shall stand suspended till such final orders are passed therein. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk