JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

“a) Call for the records leading to Ext.P4 order and quash the same by issuing a a writ of Certiorari, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction.

b) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 1st Respondent to reconsider Ext.P3 application and dispose it afresh according to law.

c) Issue such other appropriate writs, orders or directions as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

d) Dispense with filing of the translation of vernacular documents produced by the petitioner in the above case ”[SIC]

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the 1^st respondent rejecting the Form–5 application submitted by him 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 the authorised officer has failed to