ABDUL KAREEM Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the present appeal filed under Sec. 5 of the Kerala High Court Act, the original petitioner has challenged the judgment dtd. 13/7/2023, passed by the learned Single Judge, in the captioned W.P.(C)No.2953/2023. After having heard the learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties, the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition in part. The observations made by the learned Single Judge in paragraph No.14 of the judgment reads as under: 14. I am, therefore, of the firm view that further action pursuant to Ext.P12 must be considered and completed by the Government at the appropriate level, after hearing the petitioners 2 to 4, being the legal heirs of the original 1st petitioner. In the afore circumstances, I allow this writ petition to the limited extent of directing the competent Authority of the Government to take up Ext.P12 report and complete necessary action pursuant thereto, after affording the petitioners 2 to 4, or their authorized representative, an opportunity of being heard; thus culminating in an appropriate order and necessary action thereon, as expeditiously as is possible but not later than six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. I, however, clarify that since the claim of the original 1st petitioner against cancellation of Ext.P2 'Patta' remains concluded through Ext.P11 and which has not been challenged until this writ petition was filed, the Government will be at liberty to consider her claim solely based on Ext.P12, subject to all other statutory and other legal requirements being satisfied. I further clarify that this does not mean that this Court has concluded that the original 1st petitioner is entitled to assignment as stated in Ext.P12, but only that this should be considered in its right perspective by the Government; and that if any such is found eligible to her, it can be offered to petitioners 2 to 4 as a fresh one. Until such time as the afore exercise is completed and the resultant order communicated to the petitioners, the interim order of this Court dtd. 28/1/2022 will continue to be in force.

(2.) Having heard the learned Advocates appearing for respective parties, we dispose of this appeal. However, it is made clear that the authority shall pass orders afresh as per the directions issued by the learned Single Judge, without being influenced by the earlier orders. The writ appeal is disposed of accordingly.