IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
LALITHA MURALEEDHARAN – Appellant
Versus
THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner sought quashing of fee demand. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court found fee request unsustainable; referenced prior ruling. (Para 3 , 4) |
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed with following prayers :
i To issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or directionquashing Exhibit- P5.
ii Issue any appropriate Writ, Order or direction declaring that the Petitioner is not liable to make any payment as provided under Rule 12(9) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules , 2008.
iii Issue Writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the 1st Respondent to consider Exhibit-P4 Application on merits without insisting on the payment of fee.
iv To dispense with the production English translation of Vernacular Exhibits.
v Issue such other Order, or Direction as this Honourable Court may deems just fit, in the circumstances of the case.” [sic] 2. The petitioner submitted an application in Form-6 of the Kerala Conservation of the Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008. By order dated 08.05.2025, the 1st respondent directed the petitioner to make remittance of Rs.39,600/- as pre-condition for allowing the application. According to the petitioner, the lan
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.