Balakrishnan vs The Revenue Divisional Officer and Others

Antony Dominic, J.—Proceedings were initiated against the Petitioner under the provisions of the Kerala Land Conservancy Act which resulted in Ext.P4 order of the 4th Respondent. Aggrieved by Ext.P4, Petitioner has filed Ext.P5 revision and Ext.P6 stay petition before the 5th Respondent and on receipt of Exts.P5 and P6, the same has been acknowledged by Ext.P7. During the pendency of the revision and stay petition, Ext.P8 order has been issued by the 2nd Respondent to the 3rd Respondent to implement Ext.P4 and submit a report. It is in these circumstances, apprehending eviction in pursuance to Ext.P4, during the pendency of revision and stay petition, this writ petition is filed.

Admittedly on being served of Ext.P4, Exts.P5 and P6 revision and stay have been filed challenging the order. Therefore, it will be premature to evict the Petitioner from the property at this stage.

In that view of the matter, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions:

(i) Fifth Respondent before whom Ext.P5 revision is pending shall dispose of the revision with notice to the Petitioner and as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months of production of a copy of this judgment.

(ii) It is directed that until orders are passed as above, further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P4 and P8 shall be kept in abeyance.

Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before Respondents 3, 4 and 5 for compliance.