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) 5175

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
PAVITHRAN. A – Appellant
Versus
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 3103 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.AVM.SALAHUDIN, SMT.M.P.SEETHA, SHRI.SIVA PRASAD L.R.
For the Respondents: learned Government Pleader

Court mandates timely consideration of administrative applications regarding land classification under relevant statutes.

Headnote:The writ petition was filed under the Kerala Land Utilization Act seeking mandamus orders to consider applications regarding land classification. The petitioner contended that requests submitted for alteration from 'Nilam' to 'Purayidom' were not considered. The court directed the 3rd respondent to consider the request based on prior orders within one month. The petitioner was instructed to provide a copy of the judgment for compliance.

Table of Content
1. filing an application for land classification consideration. (Para 1 , 2)
2. hearing of both parties and consideration. (Para 3)
3. court directs timely consideration of applications. (Para 4)

JUDGMENT

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

“i) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 3rd respondent to consider and pass final orders on Exhibits-P4, P5 &

P7 applications forthwith.

ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 3rd and 4th respondents to finalize the correction of land classification from ‘Nilam’ to ‘Purayidom’ in the BTR for R.S Nos. 89/18 and 89/20 of Nellikode village without further delay.

Iii) To issue any other writ, order or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

2. The petitioner obtained Ext.P3 order under the provisions of Kerala Land Utilization Act . Thereafter, the petitioner filed Ext.P7 Form A in accordance with the Kerala Land Tax Act . The grievance of the petitioner is that the same has not been considered.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

4. After hearing both sides, the 3rd respondent is directed to consider Ext.P7 within a time frame.

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

(i) The 3rd respondent is directed to consider Ext.P7 in the light of Ext.P3, as expeditiously as possible, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

(ii) The petitioner will produce a certified copy of this judgment before the 3rd respondent 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