JUDGMENT

The petitioner has filed the captioned writ petition seeking to challenge Exts.P4, P10 and P12 orders and also seeking a direction to the 2^nd respondent to reconsider Ext.P6 complaint afresh in the light of Ext.P11 Government Order.

2. The petitioner is stated to be in ownership and possession of 17.40 Ares of land in Survey No.465/5 of Block 3 of Kidangannur Village. As per Ext.P1, the petitioner contends that he was remitting land tax also with respect to the property in question. The property was lying low compared the neighboring properties and according to the petitioner, the property was also used for paddy cultivation during the period from 1965 to 1972 on the basis of a call made by the Hon'ble Prime Minister of India when there was shortage of food. The petitioner states that, in the settlement register, the property has been described as 'Purayidam'. However, according to the petitioner, on the basis of a mistake in the resurvey it got classified as 'Nilam', on account of which it was included in the data bank. In such circumstances, two sets of proceedings were initiated by the petitioner. The first one was for removing the property from the data bank by institu