Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
JANASEVA SAMITHI – Appellant
Versus
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner requests quashing of rejected application. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court hears arguments from both sides. (Para 3) |
| 3. court observes failure in statutory compliance and references prior case law. (Para 4) |
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:
“(i) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing Exhibit.P1 and to allow the form 5 applications of the petitioner, and (ii) To exempt the petitioner from producing translation of vernacular document produced herewith as Exhibit.P1, and (iii) To issue such other writ order or direction 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.P1 order passed by the 1st respondent rejecting the Form–5 application submitted by the former Secretary of the petitioner Society 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 in the application.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.
4. This Court perused the impugn
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
