MARYKUTTY ANTONY Vs. GOVT OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER's mother while she was alive filed an application in the year 1971 under S. 75 (3) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act seeking to acquire land for getting the second respondent's Kudikidappu shifted to another side. Since the Government alone had competence to dispose of application under S, 75 (3), the Revenue Divisional officer transferred the said application to the first respondent, Government. The second respondent had filed two applications for purchase of Kudikidappu. But they were dismissed on the ground that the application filed by the mother under S. 75 (3) was pending. After 18 years, the first respondent issued notice to the petitioner calling upon her to show cause why her mother's petit ion under S. 75 (3) should not be rejected. Ext. P1 is the said notice. She filed a petition stating that she may be impleaded as the sole legal representative of the applicant and that she was entitled to all the rights of her mother including that of moving the first respondent under s. 75 (3) and that she was prepared to deposit whatever amount that was necessary to meet the expenses of acquisition. Ext. P2 is the-said petition. Thereafter the first respondent passed the impugned order Ext. P3 stating that the right of the applicant has not been sufficiently recognised and crystallised by any government Order and in the circumstances there is no ground to allow the application.

(2.) IN this O. P. the petitioner has challenged the order of the Government.