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) 57172

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
KAYALATT KUTTYKRISHNAN @ KUTTYKRISHNAN KIDAVU – Appellant
Versus
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 46661 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.FARHANA K.H., SHRI.MUHASIN K.M.
For the Respondents: SR GP SMT VIDYA KURIAKOSE

The Court mandates authorities to act timely on applications, reinforcing administrative accountability.

Headnote:The Writ Petition requests for a mandamus to the respondents regarding the application under section 2(XVA) of the Act. The petitioner seeks timely action on the application and associated reports. The Court directed compliance within specified time frames, emphasizing expedience in processing the application and submissions. 'The petitioner will produce a certified copy of this judgment...'.

Table of Content
1. petitioner requests action on application. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court hears counsel's submission. (Para 3)
3. court directs timely processing. (Para 4)

JUDGMENT

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

"i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction to 2nd respondent or the officer authorized under section 2(XVA) of the Act to consider and pass order on Ext.P3 application within a time frame fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or other writ, order or direction to the 6th respondent to submit a report to the 2nd respondent or the officer authorized under section 2(XVA) of the Act within a time frame fixed by the Hon’ble Court.

iii) [[Issue a writ of mandamus directing the

7th respondent to file a report before the 2nd respondent or the officer authorized under section 2(XVA) of the Act and 6th respondent with regard to nature and lie of the petitioner’s property in 2008.

iv) To dispense with the production of the translation of vernacular documents.

v) Issue such other writ, order or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

[SIC]

2. When this Writ Petition came up for consideration, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner will be satisfied if a direction is issued to consider Ext.

P3 Form – 5 application within a time frame.

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.P3 application within a time frame.

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

1. The 6th respondent is directed to submit the necessary report based on the Ext. P3 application to the 3rd respondent/Authorised O expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

2. The 3rd respondent/Authorised O to consider Ext. P3 application (if it is pending and if it is in order) based on the report received from the 6th respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the report.

3. The petitioner will produce a certified copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this Writ Petition with exhibits, before the 3rd and 6th 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