Allowed

State of Kerala v. Eldhose

Kerala HC29 Sept 2011RP/683/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a reference review petition filed by the State challenging an order that directed disposal of a land assignment application and maintenance of status quo. The Court recalled the direction, restored the writ petition, and noted it did not decide the merits. Status quo remains pending before the appropriate Bench.

What did the court decide?

Review Petition allowed; order directing disposal of petitioner's application and maintaining status quo recalled; Writ Petition restored to file for consideration by the appropriate Bench.

State of Kerala Vs Eldhose — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 29TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 7TH ASWINA 1933

¶5

RP.No. 683 of 2011(W)

¶6

---------------------

¶7

AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.17390/2011 Dated 28/06/2011

¶8

REVIEW PETITIONER : RESPONDENTS

¶9

¶10

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, REVENUE (R) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695 001

¶11

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI DISTRICT, COLLECTORATE, KUYILIMALA, IDUKKI, PIN 685 602

¶12

THE TAHSILDAR, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK, TALUK OFFICE, UDUMANCHOLA, PIN 685 554

¶13

THE TAHSILDAR, LAND ASSIGNMENT, DEVIKULAM, NIRMITHY KENDRA BUILDING, DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 613.

¶14

BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER MS. SUSHEELA BHAT

¶15

RESPONDENT : PETITIONER

¶16

¶17

ELDHOSE, S/O. YOYAKKI, AGED 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT KUMMATT HOUSE, CHINNACKANAL, SINGKANDAM.P.O, IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶18

BY ADV. MR. N.M.VARGHESE

¶19

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.

¶21

¶22

R.P. No. 683 of 2011 In W.P (C) No . 17390 of 2011

¶23

¶24

Dated, this the 29^th September , 2011

¶25

ORDER

¶26

This Review Petition has been preferred at the instance of the State, mainly pointing out that, the verdict passed by this Court at the admission stage, directing to have disposed of the application (Ext. P4) preferred by the petitioner for assignment and to maintain 'status quo' till then, is liable to be re-considered for the reason that such an application has never been filed by the writ petitioner.

¶27

When the matter came up for consideration before this Court on 22.09.2011, the learned counsel for the writ petitioner sought time to produce proof. Accordingly, I.A. No. 589 of 2011 has been filed, producing Annexures I and II., which are the photocopies of the application dated 24.09.2011 made before the concerned Village Officer and its receipt dated 27.09.2011. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has subsequently been served with copies of the relevant extracts of the register from the village office and that he wants to adduce further evidence as well.

¶28

The learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the Review Petitioner/State submits that the original register does not

¶29

R.P. No. 683 of 2011 in W.P. (C) No. 17390 of 2011

¶30

: 2 :

¶31

contain any such material and further that the concerned land for assignment sought for by the petitioner is about five acres, which is not liable to be granted under any circumstance.

¶32

After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, this Court finds that the matter requires to be heard in detail with regard to the rival contentions.

¶33

In the said circumstances, the direction given by this Court to have Ext. P4 considered and finalized by the concerned respondent is recalled. The Review Petition is allowed and the Writ Petition is restored to file for being considered by the appropriate Bench. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything with regard to the merits of the case. The 'status quo' will continue only till the matter is listed before the appropriate Bench.

¶34

Sd/

¶35

P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE

¶36

kmd

¶37

/True copy/

¶38

P.A. to Judge

State of Kerala v. Eldhose

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Kerala v. Eldhose

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravi Sankar Vs Mr K.v.Shenoy

Mr.Vijayan Vs State of Kerala

A.Ahammed Kutty Vs State of Kerala

Suseela Vs Dist.Medical Officer. Kozhikode

Kerala State Electricity Board and Anoth Vs Sajan P.K.

Hashir Abdulla Vs University of Calicut and Others