Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

V.SIVANANDAN, S/O.SETHUMADHAVAN NAIR versus THE CONSERVATOR OF CUSTODIAN OF FOREST

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


V.SIVANANDAN, S/O.SETHUMADHAVAN NAIR v. THE CONSERVATOR OF CUSTODIAN OF FOREST - WP(C) No. 22787 of 2007(S) [2007] RD-KL 14383 (27 July 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 22787 of 2007(S)

1. V.SIVANANDAN, S/O.SETHUMADHAVAN NAIR,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. THE CONSERVATOR OF CUSTODIAN OF FOREST,
... Respondent

2. THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, PALAKKAD.

3. THE STATE BANK OF INDIA,

4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE

For Petitioner :SRI.SAKIR.K.H.

For Respondent :SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH

The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.H.L.DATTU The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

Dated :27/07/2007

O R D E R

H.L. DATTU, C.J. & K.T. SANKARAN, J.

................................................................................... W.P.(C) No. 22787 OF 2007 ...................................................................................

Dated this the 27th July, 2007



J U D G M E N T

H.L. Dattu, C.J.: A public spirited citizen is before this court, complaining inaction of the first respondent, viz., the Conservator and Custodian of Forest, E Circle, Olavakkod, Palakkad district, in declaring the lands in Sy. No. 59/1, 80/3 and 90/2 of Shornur-II Village as fragile lands.

2. Before approaching this court, the petitioner had filed a representation dated 09.07.2007 before the first respondent . Even before the said authority could react to the request made by the petitioner, the petitioner has rushed to this court by filing this Writ Petition seeking for the above mentioned relief.

3. In our opinion, the Writ Petition is wholly premature. The petitioner should have requested the first respondent-authority to consider his representation and pass appropriate orders. If for any reason, the reliefs sought for by the petitioner are not granted, then only he/she can approach this court. In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition requires to be rejected and it is rejected. Ordered accordingly. H.L. DATTU, CHIEF JUSTICE. K.T. SANKARAN,

JUDGE.

lk


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.