The subject matter of these writ petitions is a proposed petroleum outlet and the issues raised, are intricately connected. Hence these matters are consolidated and heard. Therefore, this common judgment.

2. The 2nd petitioner in WP(C).No.8090 of 2006 and in WP.(C).No.5956 of 2006 is the managing partner of the 1st petitioner in WP (C) No.8090 of 2006, a firm, which is a franchisee of the 1st petitioner in WP (C) No.5956 of 2006, an authorised petroleum marketer, hereinafter referred to as “Reliance”. He is one among the co-owners of the land on which the petroleum outlet is proposed.

3. By Ext.P4 in WP (C) No.5956 of 2006, the District Collector granted permission, hereinafter, “KLU Permission”, for short, to the franchisee’s managing partner and his co-owners, under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1987, hereinafter, the “KLU Order”, for short, to convert the wet lands to provide the site for the proposed petroleum outlet. The Land Revenue Commissioner, hereinafter, the “Commissioner”, for short, entertained an appeal filed by respondents 4 & 5 and others, who are stated to be neighbours, against that order and passed Ext.P6 order staying the operation of the KLU Perm