Raji S. Sindhu vs The District Collector on 3 April, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 11065 of 2009(C)


1. RAJI S. SINDHU,W/O. K. MAHESH,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE,

3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PUTHOOR VILLAGE,

4. SRI. REJENDRAN NAIR, S/O. BALAKRISHNAN

                For Petitioner  :SRI.B.MOHANLAL

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :03/04/2009

 O R D E R
                       ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                   -------------------------
                     W.P.(C.) No.11065 of 2009
              ---------------------------------
               Dated, this the 3rd day of April, 2009

                           J U D G M E N T

In respect of the property covered by Ext.P2 settlement deed,

Ext.P4 application was submitted before the 2nd respondent praying

for effecting mutation in favour of the 4th respondent, for the reason

that, the petitioner executed Ext.P3 conveying the property in favour

of the 4th respondent. The petitioner submits that on receipt of the

application referred to as above, the 2nd respondent expressed some

reservations in effecting the mutation sought for. The petitioner

states that although, she submitted her explanation by Exts.P6 & P7,

the 2nd respondent forwarded the matter for obtaining the opinion of

the additional Government Pleader, who communicated his opinion

as per Ext.P9 to the effect that nothing stands in the way of passing

orders on Ext.P4. Despite all these, the 2nd respondent has not

passed final orders on Ext.P4 and therefore, the writ petition has

been filed.

2. If as stated by the petitioner, by Ext.P9, also the

additional Government Pleader has clarified the position, it is up to

WP(C) No.11065/2009
-2-

the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P4 in the light of Exts.P6, P7 &

P9.

3. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the

2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 in the manner

as observed above. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible,

at any rate, within one month of production of a copy of this

judgment, along with a copy of this writ petition.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)
jg