Court emphasizes the need for timely administrative action on land classification applications under relevant conservation rules.

JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers :

“ i) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 1^st respondent to consider and pass orders on Exhibit P3 application after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner;

ii) Declare that the property of the petitioner’s property having an extent of 16.19 Ares of the property lying in Resurvey No. 192/30 of Marthuroad Village in Palakkad Taluk, block No.38 Palakkad District is not a paddy land.

iii) issue such other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case;

iv) Dispense with the production of English translation of the vernacular Exhibits produced in the Writ petition. “ [sic]

2. When this writ petition came up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he will be satisfied if a direction is issued to consider Ext.P3 application submitted in Form 6 under Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules , 2008.

3. Heard the learned Government Pleader also.

4. After hearing both sides, I think that prayer can be allowed.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:

1) The 3^rd respondent is directed to submit necessary report based on Ext.P3 as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

2) Once the report is received, the 1^st respondent/competent authority shall consider Ext.P3, (if it is pending and if it is in order) as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four months from the date of receipt of the report from the

3^rd respondent.

3) The petitioner will produce a certified copy of this judgment before the 1^st and 3^rd respondents for compliance.

Sd/-