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) 52301

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
JOSSY JOSEPH – Appellant
Versus
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 43480 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.VINU CHAND, SHRI.C.R.VINOD KUMAR, SRI.JOSE KURIAN, SHRI.GEEVARGHESE MATHEW, SMT.SHEENA K.S., SHRI.RAGIN ROY, SHRI.ABIJITH C., SHRI.RAJAN K. PAUL, SHRI.KEVIN SEBY MANIKATHAN, SMT.ANU PAUL
For the Respondents: GP SMT DEEPA V

Timely administrative action on applications is required under conservation laws.

Headnote:This writ petition seeks directions to consider an application under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008. The petitioner seeks a mandamus regarding the application (Exhibit P3) for the district collector's review. The court directed the competent authority to process the report within specified timelines. The main issues were whether the application would be addressed promptly, emphasizing timely administrative action. The court affirmed this position, stating the government must respond expediently to such applications. The petitioner was instructed to present the judgment for compliance and report submission was mandated to occur within stringent timelines.

Table of Content
1. court mandates compliance with specified timelines for the application. (Para 1 , 2)
2. the court emphasizes the need for timely responses from the authorities. (Para 4)

JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers :

i) “ Call for the records relating to Exhibit P3 application and issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Exhibit P3 application at the earliest.

ii) Dispense with filing of the translation of vernacular documents all Exhibits documents, in the above writ petition iii) Such other orders, directions and reliefs as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper to grant. “ [sic]

2. When this writ petition came up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he will be satisfied if a direction is issued to consider Ext.P3 application submitted in Form 5 under Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules , 2008.

3. Heard the learned Government Pleader also.

4. After hearing both sides, I think that prayer can be allowed.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:

1) The 4th respondent is directed to submit necessary report based on Ext.P3 as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

2) Once the report is received, the 2nd respondent/competent authority shall consider Ext.P3, (if it is pending and if it is in order) as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of the report from the

4th respondent.

3) The petitioner will produce a certified copy of this judgment before the 2nd and 4th respondents for compliance.

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE SKS

Judgment reserved NA
Date of Judgment 20/11/25
Judgment dictated 20/11/25
Draft judgment placed 21/11/25
Final judgment uploaded 22/11/25
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 43480/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX PAID RECEIPT OF THE ABOVE PROPERTY DATED 05.01.2024 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF DRAFT DATA BANK ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED

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