REENA WILLIAMS Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is stated as aggrieved of some mistakes crept in the survey records leading to an adverse order passed by the 2nd respondent whichmade her to file Ext.P2 before the 1st respondent.According to the petitioner, Ext.P2 appeal is pending consideration before the 1st respondent; without regard to which, the 2nd respondent has issued Ext.P3 notice of hearing. The contention of the petitioner is that, the original order having been passed by the 2nd respondent, there is no jurisdiction or competence for the 2nd respondent to issue Ext.P3 notice of hearing in respect of the appeal pending before the 1st respondent.

(2.) THE learned Government Pleader appearing for the 1st respondent submits that Ext.P2 is not liable to be considered as an appealas no such appeal is legally maintainable before the 1st respondent. It is further stated that on receipt of Ext.P2, the 1st respondent however, forwarded the matter to the 2nd respondent to have a second look and it is accordingly that Ext.P3 notice has been issued. It is also discernible from Ext.P3 that one J.Sureshkumar, stated as the power of attorney holder of the petitioner, had submitted an application on 31.8.2010 before the 2nd respondent (referred to as item 2 therein) and it was referring to the said application that Ext.P3 notice has been issued by the 2nd respondent.