Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
SUJATHA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks to quash rejection of application. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. authorized officer failed to comply with inspection requirements. (Para 4) |
| 3. court highlights necessary considerations for land assessments. (Para 5) |
| 4. petition allowed, earlier order set aside. (Para 6) |
JUDGMENT
This Writ Petition (C) is filed seeking the following reliefs:
" i. To issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction, calling records leading to Exhibit.P4 and quash the same;
ii. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction directing the 3rd respondent to allow Exhibit.P3 form 5 application of the petitioner within a time frame."
[SIC]
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the
3rd respondent rejecting the Form–5 application submitted by her 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 th
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
