JUDGMENT

The petitioners have approached this Court challenging Ext.P12, wherein the application submitted by them for removal of the property from the Data Bank has been rejected mainly for the reason that the Local Level Monitoring Committee [for short, ‘the LLMC’] has not recommended for the removal of the property from the Data Bank. Petitioners have produced Ext.P9 decision of the LLMC, which reveals that the LLMC has taken a decision that the request for removal of the property from the Data Bank could be granted, if the petitioners make an undertaking to construct a concrete canal for the free flow of water to the nearby paddy field. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are ready to make such construction.

2. Taking into consideration the fact that there is a finding in Ext.P12 to the effect that the LLMC has not recommended for removal of the property from the Data Bank, I am of the opinion that there is total non-

application of mind on the part of the Revenue Divisional Officer while issuing Ext.P10. Yet another aspect to be noted is that in Ext.P8 judgment, the Court directed the LLMC to take a decision on the application for removal of the