JUDGMENT

The petitioner is the owner in possession of a property having an extent of 4.22 Ares comprised in the Re-Survey No. 213/6-3 and 4.29 Ares of property comprised in Re-survey No.213/9-3 of Kureekkad Village in Kanayannur Taluk in Ernakulam District.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that, even though the said property is a garden land, the same has been wrongly included in the Data Bank prepared by the respondents by describing it as ‘Nilam’. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 application in Form-5 before the 2^nd respondent, which culminated in Ext.P5 order. According to the petitioner, Ext.P5 order is a non speaking order without any specific reference to the nature of the land and instead the order has been passed simply accepting the report of the LLMC. Besides, the report of the 6^th respondent, regarding the nature of the land was also not obtained.

3. I have heard Sri.Avaneesh Koyikkara, the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

4. After carefully going through the materials placed on record, I find some force in the contention put forward by the learned Counsel for the petitioner. As rightly pointed out by him