J U D G M E N T

The grievance of the petitioner is that Ext.P1 application preferred before the 2nd respondent to cause to effect necessary correction/entry in the 'BTR' with regard to the nature of the property owned, possessed and enjoyed by the petitioner is left unattended to and that the delay in considering the same is causing much loss and hardship to the petitioner. The case of the petitioner is that, the property owned by the petitioner as above is a reclaimed dry land wherein, no paddy cultivation is being effected and is totally unsuitable for such cultivation as well. But the property remains described as 'Nilam' in the BTR, which has absolutely no nexus with the physical nature of the property as on date. It is stated that the petitioner is entitled to enjoy the property in a better manner, putting the same for such other use, by virtue of the enabling provisions under the KLU and it was in the said circumstance, that the petitioner approached the 2nd respondent by filing Ext.P1.

W.P.(C). No. 14927 of 2013 2 It is stated that the property has been shown as 'reclaimed land' in the Date Bank Register and that the only relief sought for is to direct the 2nd respondent to co