Administrative bodies must address applications within specified timelines to prevent undue delay in the public interest.

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 dated 20.06.2024 submitted by the petitioner before the first respondent under section 5 (4) (i) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act , 2008 within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon’ble court;

II. To dispense with the production of the English translation 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. When this Writ Petition came up for consideration, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner will be satisfied if a direction is issued to consider Ext.P2 Form – 5 application within a time frame.

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 application within a time frame.

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

1. The 3^rd respondent is directed to submit the necessary report based on the Ext.P2 application to the 1^st respondent/Authorised O expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

2. The 1^st respondent/Authorised O consider Ext.P2 application (if it is pending and if it is in order) based on the report received from the 3^rd respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the report.

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

Sd/-