Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
HARISANKAR V. MENON, J
SHAJI THOMAS MAMPILLY – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner sought removal of property from the data bank. (Para 1) |
| 2. court observed lack of required expert report before issuance of the impugned order. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. court directed reconsideration with specific timelines. (Para 4 , 5) |
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner has submitted an application in Form 5 (Ext.P3) under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules , 2008, seeking removal of the property mentioned therein from the data bank. By Ext.P5 order, the 3rd respondent herein has sought to reject the aforementioned application, on account of which the petitioner is before this Court through this writ petition.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.
3. A reading of Ext.P4 would show that the impugned order at Ext.P5 has been issued on the basis of a report obtained from the agricultural office. However, the respondents do not seem to have obtained any report from the Kerala State Remote Sensing and Environment Centre (KSREC) before issuing an order in the nature of one at Ext.P5. Insofar as the petitioner sought for removal of the property in question from the data ban
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
