JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

“i) To call for the records relating to Ext.P2 order of the 4^th respondent and to quash the same by issuing a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ;

ii) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, direction or order directing the 4^th respondent to consider and pass fresh orders on the Ext.P1 FORM-5 request of the petitioner in the interest of justice;

iii) Dispense with filing of the translation of vernacular documents.

iv) Grant such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the case.”[SIC]

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P2 order passed by the 4^th respondent rejecting Ext.P1 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 comply with the statutor