IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH DECEMBER 2010 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 15144 of 2010(P) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- 1. SMT.NAVAMANI W/O.JOONIS DHANASEKHARAN, AGED 49 YEARS, NAYAMAKKAD, MUNNAR. 2. SRI.PRAKASH PONNIAH S/O SUNDARAM, AGED 36 YEARS, MUNNAT COLONY PO, MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.M.VARGHESE RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR IDUKKI DISTRICT, COLLECTORATE, KUYILIMALA, IDUKKI. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, DEVIKULAM TALUK, DEVIKULAM. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.DLEEP MOHAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs/ WP(C).No. 15144/2010(P) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF POSSESSION ISSUED IN THE NAME OF THE 1ST PETITIONER DATED 28/06/1996. P2: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF RATION CARD OF THE 1ST PETITIONER. P3: COPY OF ELECTORAL IDENTITY CARD OF THE 1ST PETITIONER. P4: COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF POSSESSION DATED 11/02/2002 ISSUED IN THE NAME OF THE 2ND PETITONER. P6: COPY OF ELECTORAL IDENTITY CARD OF THE 2ND PETITIONER. P7: COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF MEDICAL BOARD DATED 08/12/2005. P8: MEDICAL REFERENCE DATED 30/05/2002 PERTAINING TO THE DISABILITY OF THE 2ND PETITIONER'S SON. P9: COPY OF COMMUNITY CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN THE NAME OF THE 2ND PETITIONER. P10: COPY OF G.O.(MS)NO.394/2008 DATED 20/11/2008. P12: COPY OF APPLICATION FOR ASSIGNMENT SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER DATED 30/04/2009. P13: COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED O3/05/2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITONERS BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE svs/ ANTONY DOMINIC, J -------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No. 15144 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of December, 2010 JUDGMENT According to the petitioners, they have sought assignment of land in their possession. Ext.P11 is the copy of the application made by the 2nd petitioner and in the writ petition it is stated that the 1st petitioner has not retained the copy, therefore has not produced. 2. Petitioners submit that there is long delay in passing orders on the applications and that though they submitted Ext.P13 representation, there has been no response even to the representation. It is in these circumstances this writ petition is filed. 3. Going by the pleadings, applications received by the 2nd respondent are pending without orders. Therefore, the 2nd respondent should consider the applications in accordance with the rules governing claims for assignment of land. W.P.(C).No.15144 OF 2010 2 4. Therefore, without expressing anything on the merits of the claim, I direct the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on applications, at any rate within eight weeks of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE dmb