State Of Kerala Represented By The vs T.G.Sunny on 4 December, 2008

Kerala High Court
State Of Kerala Represented By The vs T.G.Sunny on 4 December, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

RP.No. 1271 of 2008(Y)


1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
                      ...  Petitioner
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE,
3. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, LAND ACQUISITION
4. THE REVENUE INSPECTOR,SPECIAL TAHSILDAR

                        Vs



1. T.G.SUNNY, THONDUPARAMBIL,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE

 Dated :04/12/2008

 O R D E R
                      PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J.
                     -----------------------------------
                        R.P. No. 1271 of 2008
                 -------------------------------------------
              Dated this the 4th day of December, 2008

                                 ORDER

Heard Mr. Basant Balaji, learned Government Pleader and Mr.

Rinny Stephen, learned counsel for the respondent. Mr. Basant,

Government Pleader, submits that pursuant to the judgment sought to

be reviewed, fresh notification under Section 4(1) was issued by the

L.A officer, since the earlier notification under Section 4(1) had

become stale. Pursuant to that notification in deference to the direction

of this court an enquiry under Section 5A was conducted. The

Government pleader submits that if a declaration under Section 6(1) is

to be made on the basis of 5A enquiry now conducted, the said

declaration may be beyond the period of limitation, since under the

judgment of this court specific liberty has not been given for

promulgating fresh notification under Section 4(1). In short, the request

of the Government in this review petition is that it be clarified that the

Government will be at liberty to issue fresh notification under Section

4(1).

2. Mr. Rinny Stephen opposed the request of the Government.

R.P. No. 1271/ 2008
2

According to him, such a clarification issued by this court will affect

the petitioner’s right to challenge the 4(1) notification as a colourable

exercise of power . I cannot agree. The petitioner had no grievance

about the judgment of this court dated 14/08/2007. Relief given in that

judgment is only to have a 5A enquiry conducted. Since such enquiry

is now conducted, this court cannot be a party to the creation of

situation of that enquiry becoming infructuous.

Accordingly, I dispose of the review petition issuing the

following clarifications;

1. The Government is at liberty to issue fresh

notification under Section 4(1) pursuant to the

judgment of this court dated 14/08/2007.

2. The fresh notification under Section 4(1) already

issued, pursuant to the enquiry under Section 5A is

conducted, will be treated as regular and in order.

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE

scm

Leave a Reply

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

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *