IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V. KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
VASUDEVAN K. – Appellant
Versus
DISTRICT COLLECTOR – Respondent
JUDGMENT
The above Writ Petition (C) is filed with the following prayers:
i. a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction to call for the records leading to Ext.P15 order and quash the same.
ii. a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction to the first respondent to allow the Ext.P3 application within a reasonable time.
OR reconsider Ext.P3 application afresh as the petitioner’s property as an unnotified land under section 27A of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act , 2008 within a reasonable time after afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
iii. such other relief’s as this Hon’ble Court deems fit to grant in the nature of this case.
iv. a direction to dispense with filing of the translation of vernacular document produced with this writ petition.
2. The petitioner submitted an application in Form 6 in accordance with the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008 before the authorized officer. The application was rejected as evident by Ext.P8. The same was challenged by the petitioner by filing an appeal. Appeal was also dismissed as evident by Ext.P12.
The petitioner challenged these two ord
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.