Loading...

C.A.Abdul Rahim vs The District Collector on 28 August, 2009

Kerala High Court
C.A.Abdul Rahim vs The District Collector on 28 August, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 25215 of 2009(V)


1. C.A.ABDUL RAHIM,S/O.ABDUL RAUF,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,ERNAKULAM.
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE TAHSILDAR,

3. THE COMMISSIONER,

4. STATE OF KERALA,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.JAJU BABU

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI

 Dated :28/08/2009

 O R D E R
                       V.GIRI, J.
         ----------------------------------------
               W.P.(C).No.25215 of 2009
         ----------------------------------------
        Dated this the 28th day of August, 2009.


                      JUDGMENT

The petitioner claims to be owner of a

property comprised in Survey No.241/2

(R.S.No.601/5) of Charanallur Village. The

application filed by the petitioner for assignment

of the property was rejected by the District

Collector by Ext.P1 order. Ext.P1 was affirmed by

a learned Judge of this court in Ext.P2 judgment.

In the meanwhile, the petitioner preferred Ext.P3

appeal before the Commissioner of Land Revenue

and in Ext.P4 judgment, a Bench of this court

directed the appeal to be disposed of,

untrammelled by Ext.P2 judgment. The appeal

has now been dismissed under Ext.P5. Learned

counsel for the petitioner submits that the

rejection is essentially based on Ext.P2 judgment.

W.P.(C).No.25215 of 2009

:: 2 ::

2. Be that as it may, Ext.P6 revision has

been filed by the petitioner challenging Exts.P1

and P5 and this writ petition seeks reliefs in

relation to the same.

3. Since by Ext.P4 judgment a Bench of

this court directed to consider the appeal

untrammelled by Ext.P2 judgment, that ought to

have been done.

4. Since a statutory revision has been

preferred, the same shall be considered and

disposed of.

5. I heard learned Government Pleader

also.

The writ petition is disposed of directing

the 4th respondent to consider and pass orders on

Ext.P6, keeping in mind the observations of the

Bench of this court in Ext.P4, untrammelled by

the observations and findings in Ext.P2 judgment,

W.P.(C).No.25215 of 2009

:: 3 ::

within three months from the date of receipt of a

copy of this judgment. The order of status quo

passed by the Bench in Ext.P4 shall continue till

orders are passed on Ext.P6 by the Government.

Sd/-

(V.GIRI)
JUDGE
sk/

//true copy//

P.S. to Judge

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information