SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 4304

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
THYKOODAM EDAVAKA CHRISTEEYA SANGAM – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 3391 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.S.SUNIL KUMAR, SRI.T.X.SHAM JOSEPH, SMT.LEKSHMI S.SEKHER, SRI.K.J.SUNIL
For the Respondents: Smt. Vidya Kuriakose, Senior GP

The court established the procedural obligations for timely consideration of land conservation applications under existing laws.

Headnote:This judgment addresses a writ petition seeking directions under Section 27A of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 regarding the consideration of an application under Form 6. The court determined to direct the RDO to report on the application within one month, with a stipulation for timely consideration by the authorized officer thereafter. The prayer for expeditious resolution was granted, ensuring compliance within four months post-report submission. The decision outlines the framework for addressing the applicant's request as per applicable law.

Table of Content
1. writ petition filed for application consideration under land conservation laws. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court hears arguments from both sides regarding application process. (Para 3)
3. court directs timely processing of the application as per law. (Para 4)

JUDGMENT

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

"I. Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction to the Respondents No-2 to consider and pass appropriate orders on Exhibit-P2 application under form 6 of the Kerala Conservation of paddy Land and Wet Land Rules, 2015 in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.

II. Permit the petitioner with dispensing with filling of the translation of Exhibit-P1 and Exhibit-P2 vernacular documents produced herewith. &

III. To pass any other order as this Hon’ble Court deems fit."

[SIC]

2. The main prayer in this Writ Petition is to consider Ext.P2 Form - 6 application submitted by the petitioner under Section 27A read with Rule 12(1) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act and Rules, 2008 ('Act and Rules' in short).

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.P2 within a time frame.

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

1. The 4th respondent is directed to submit the necessary report based on the Ext.P2 application to the 2nd respondent/Authorised O period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

2. The 2nd respondent/Authorised O to consider the Ext.P2 application (if it is pending and if it is in order) based on the report received from the 4th respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the report. I make it clear that the 2nd respondent is free to pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law.

3. The petitioner will produce a certified copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this Writ Petition with exhibits, before the 2nd and 4th 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