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) 6386

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
MOHAMMED – Appellant
Versus
THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 3481 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.R.O.MUHAMED SHEMEEM, SMT.NASEEHA BEEGUM P.S.
For the Respondents: VIDYA KURIAKOSE SR.GP

The court mandated timely consideration of application under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act.

Headnote:This Writ Petition was filed under Section 27A of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act and Rules, 2008 to enhance the consideration of an application. The court directed the necessary report to be submitted and for the application to be considered within stipulated time frames. The findings emphasized timely compliance by the authorities. The final outcome directs the respondents to consider the Ext.P3 application within three months.

Table of Content
1. petitioner requests for timely consideration of application. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court emphasizes the need for a report and timely decision. (Para 3 , 4)

JUDGMENT

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

" i. To Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 1st and 2nd respondents or any other officers under them to consider and pass appropriate order on Ext-P3 expeditiously at any rate within three weeks or any reasonable time that may be fixed by this Hon’ble Court.

ii. To pass such other order, orders or direction that may be deemed just and proper by this Hon’ble Court. "

[SIC]

2. The main prayer in this Writ Petition is to consider Ext.P3 Form - 6 application filed by the petitioner under Section 27A read with Rule 12(1) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland 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.P3 within a time frame.

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

1. The 3rd respondent is directed to submit the necessary report based on the Ext.P3 application to the 1st respondent/Authorised O period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

2. The 1st respondent/Authorised O consider the Ext.P3 application (if it is pending and if it is in order) based on the report received from the 3rd 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 1st 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 3rd 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