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) 5178

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V. KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
MUSTHAFA K V – Appellant
Versus
THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PALAKKAD – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 3134 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN, SMT.SHAMSEERA. C.ASHRAF, SHRI.WINSTON K.V, SMT.ANU JACOB, SMT.ANJANA KRISHNAN, SHRI.VINCENT C. J.

The court emphasized the need for timely consideration of applications made under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, ensuring compliance with statutory timelines.

Headnote:The petitioner filed a Writ Petition seeking a mandamus to direct the first respondent to consider Exhibit-P2 application under Section 27 A of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008. The court directed consideration of the application within a specified time frame. The second respondent is to submit a report on the application within one month to the first respondent, who must decide on it within three months thereafter.

Result: The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.

Table of Content
1. petition for mandamus under the kerala conservation of paddy land and wet land act. (Para 1 , 2)
2. hearing of counsel for both parties. (Para 3)
3. court directions for reporting and decision. (Para 4)

JUDGMENT

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

“I. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the first respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Exhibit-P2, application (in form number 6) dated 25.08.2025 submitted by the petitioner before the first respondent under section 27 A of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act , 2008 for using the land for other purpose within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon’ble court;

II. To dispense with the production of the translated copies of the documents in vernacular language; and III. Issue such other writ, order or direction as this hon’ble court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

[SIC]

2. The main prayer in this Writ Petition is to consider Ext.P2 Form - 6 application filed by the petitioner under Section 27A read with Rule 12(1) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act and Rules, 2008 ('Act and Rules' in short).

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

4. After hearing both sides, I think there can be a direction to consider Ext.P2 within a time frame.

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

1. The 2nd respondent is directed to submit the necessary report based on the Ext.P2 application to the 1st respondent/Authorised O of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

2. The 1st respondent/Authorised O consider the Ext.P2 application (if it is pending and if it is in order) based on the report received from the 2th respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the report. I make it clear that the 2nd respondent is free to pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law.

3. The petitioner will produce a certified copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this Writ Petition with exhibits, before the 1st and 2nd respondents 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