A P RAHMATH Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner submits that she and her husband are owners of two plots of land having an extent of 4 Ares 5 sq. feets and 4 Ares 2 sq. meters respectively, comprised in R.S.Nos.139/2A & 2B of Vadaikkakom Desom, Thalassery Taluk in Kannur District. It is stated that in respect of the property, proceedings were initiated under the Land Conservancy Act and the 4th respondent passed Ext.P2 order dated 06/08/2010. By this order, the 4th respondent held that the petitioner has encroached into 48.45 sq. meters of Government property and on that basis, the petitioner was ordered to demolish the compound wall and vacate from the encroached portion. The petitioner submits that aggrieved by Ext.P2 order, she filed Ext.P4 revision before the District Collector. It is stated that the District Collector has heard the parties on 28/09/2010 and that orders are awaited.

(2.) Apprehension of the petitioner is that if the District Collector decides the issue against her, on account of personal animosity which the 4th respondent entertains, the 4th respondent is likely to order immediate demolition of the compound wall. Referring to Ext.P6, the petitioner submits that her son's wedding is scheduled to be held on 10/10/2010 and that in the meanwhile, if such an untoward incident happens, grave prejudice will be caused to her.

(3.) Although several allegations have been raised by the petitioner against the conduct of the 4th respondent, having regard to the fact that the 1st respondent is yet to pass orders on Ext.P4 revision filed by the petitioner, I do not think it necessary or proper for this Court to deal with those contentions, as otherwise, it might influence the decision making process of the 1st respondent. Therefore, I leave open all these contentions of the petitioner.