IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 14286 of 2009(E)
1. PONNACHI, W/O.KOMBAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
... Respondent
2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
3. GOPALAN, S/O.CHINNAN,
For Petitioner :SRI.JOHN JOSEPH(ROY)
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
Dated :24/05/2010
O R D E R
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
W.P.(C).No.14286 of 2009-E
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 24th day of May, 2010.
Judgment
Petitioner complains that the third respondent is
not obeying Ext.P6 order of the first respondent
RDO. That is a direction issued in terms of the
Kerala Land Utilisation Order which falls under
the purview of the Essential Commodities Act.
Though the third respondent does not appear in
spite of notice, the learned counsel for the
petitioner states today that after the
institution of this writ petition, the third
respondent has removed some saplings but has,
however, not restored the land in terms of Ext.P6
order. If the RDO has issued an order in the form
of Ext.P6, it is the bounden duty of that officer
and his subordinate officers, including the
second respondent, to have it enforced in terms
of law. Enforcement of orders passed under the
statutory powers is part of the guarantee of rule
WPC14286/09 -: 2 :-
of law. Under such circumstances, respondents 1
and 2 are directed to ensure that Exts.P3 and P6
are enforced in accordance with law, within a
period of three months from now. The writ
petition ordered accordingly.
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN,
JUDGE.
Sha/0506
