SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 52258

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
PARAMAESWARAN N.V – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 43671 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.J.R.PREM NAVAZ
For the Respondents: SR GP, SMT VIDYA KURIAKOSE

Court directed timely consideration of application under statutory provisions of the Kerala Conservation Act, ensuring compliance.

Headnote:This writ petition is filed seeking relief to issue a writ of mandamus regarding the consideration of Ext.P2 application under Section 27A of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008. The petitioner requested direction for a timely disposition of the application pending with the second respondent. The court directed the second respondent to consider the application based on the report from the fifth respondent within three months. The petitioner is to provide a certified copy of the judgment for compliance.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's request for application consideration. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court's direction for timely decision. (Para 3)
3. final disposal order. (Para 4)

JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

“(i) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the 2nd respondent or any other officer concerned to consider and dispose of Ext-P2 application pending before him, within a time frame fixed by this Hon’ble Court.

(ii) To dispense with the production of English Translation of documents which are in vernacular language.

(iii) Such other relief’s as this Hon’ble Court deems fit to grant in the nature of this case” [SIC]

2. The main prayer in this Writ Petition is to consider Ext.P2 Form-6 application filed by the petitioner under Section 27A read with Rule 12(1) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act and Rules, 2008 ('Act and Rules' in short).

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

4. After hearing both sides, I think there can be a direction to consider Ext.P2 within a time frame.

Therefore, this Writ Petition(C) is disposed of in the following manner:

1. The 5th respondent is directed to submit the necessary report based on Ext.P2 Form-6 application to the 2nd respondent / Authorised Officer within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

2. The 2nd respondent / Authorised O directed to consider Ext.P2 Form-6 application (if it is pending and if it is in order) based on the report received from the 5th respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the report. I make it clear that the

2nd respondent is free to pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law.

3. The petitioner will produce a certified copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this Writ Petition with exhibits, before the 2nd and 5th respondents for compliance.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top