Disposed

Prasanna.P. v. Special Tahasildar

Kerala HC10 Feb 2012WP(C)/1895/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed respondents to consider and dispose of an application under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act within one month of receiving a copy of this judgment to address delay in handling the matter.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2 within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Prasanna.P. Vs Special Tahasildar — Specific Performance | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2012/21ST MAGHA 1933

¶5

WP(C).No. 1895 of 2012 (J)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

PRASANNA.P. D/O.LATE CHANDU NAIR, AGED 49 YEARS RESIDING AT `PRAJITHA NIVAS', RAMANTHALI P.O. KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670 308.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.T.V.JAYAKUMAR NAMBOODIRI

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1 SPECIAL TAHASILDAR

¶11

LAND ACQUISITION (LA), THALASSERY

¶12

KANNUR DISTRICT-670 308.

¶13

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. MUHAMMED SHAFI M

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-02-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

DCS

¶16

WP(C).No. 1895 of 2012 (J)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS :-

¶19

EXHIBIT P1: PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27/4/2009.

¶20

EXHIBIT P2: PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 21/12/2009.

¶21

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS :- NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A. TO JUDGE

DCS

C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J.

¶26

W.P.(c) No. 1895 OF 2012-J

¶27

DATED THIS THE 10^th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2012

¶28

J U D G M E N T

¶29

The petitioner is seeking a direction for an early disposal of Ext.P2 application, within a time limit to be prescribed. Exhibit P2 is an application submitted before the 2^nd respondent under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act. According to the petitioner the application in question was submitted as early as on 01-01-2010. But no steps for consideration and disposal of the application has been taken, inspite of lapse of considerable time, is the grievance.

¶30

Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondents submitted that there is no impediment in considering and disposing Ext.P2 application, and that the delay occurred only because of the delay in production of legal heirship certificate by the petitioner. However, it is conceded that effective steps for disposal of Ext.P2 will be taken without any further delay.

¶31

W.P.(c) No. 1895/2012

¶32

-2-

¶33

Under the above mentioned circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2 at the earliest possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶34

Sd/- C.K. ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE.

¶35

AMG

¶36

True copy

¶37

P.A to Judge

Prasanna.P. v. Special Tahasildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prasanna.P. v. Special Tahasildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sethudevadasan Vs State of Kerala

Zakkeer Hussain Vs the Kollam Corporation

Saraswathy.L Vs the District Collector,Kollam

B.Vikraman Nair Vs State of Kerala

Jayalal L.V Vs State of Kerala

Safe Development Alms Trust Vs Perumatty Grama Panchayat