JUDGMENT

The above Writ Petition (C) is filed with the following prayers:

"i. Call for the records leading to Exhibit P-5 and quash the same using Writ of Certiorari or any other Writ Order or Direction;

ii. issue of Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ in the like nature, direction or order commanding the 1st Respondent to allow Exhibit P-4 application of the Petitioner made in Form 5 under “Act 28/2008” by excluding the property from the land data bank;

iii. dispense with the filing of the translation of vernacular documents;

and iv. Pass such other orders deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and that may be prayed for hereafter.”

[SIC]

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the

1^st respondent rejecting the Form–5 application submitted by him under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008 (‘Rules’, for brevity). The main grievance of the petitioner is that the authorised officer has not considered the contentions of the petitioner.

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

4. This Court perused the impugned order. I am of the considered opinion that the authorised officer has failed to c