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) 6423

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
ASHREF K.A – Appellant
Versus
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR ERNAKULAM – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 46099 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.SHERRY J. THOMAS, SRI.JOEMON ANTONY, SHRI.ANTONY NILTON REMELO, SRI.RENISH RAVEENDRAN, SMT.ANJANA P.V.
For the Respondents: SMT.VIDYA KURIAKOSE, SR.GP

The court emphasizes the necessity of adhering to proper procedures in filing property applications, ensuring timely responses from authorized officers.

Headnote:Statute Analysis: The court examines the petition under various writ orders pertaining to property applications. Facts of the Case: The petitioner seeks mandamus for a timely decision on Form-9 applications (Ext P4). Findings of the Court: The court directs procedures for application submission and deletion.

Issues: The court frames questions relating to compliance with procedural norms in application submissions.

Ratio Decidendi: The court affirms the necessity for proper procedure adherence, as indicated in prior case law and statutory framework.

Result: This writ petition is disposed of with directions for application processes and stipulated timelines.

Table of Content
1. petitioner seeks directives for timely decision on property applications. (Para 1)
2. details of form-6 and form-9 applications are discussed. (Para 2)
3. court directs procedural compliance for property application consideration. (Para 3)

JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers :

i) Call for the records pertaining to Ext P4 application submitted by the petitioner.

ii) Issue a writ of mandamus, any other writ, appropriate order directing the 2nd Respondent or 3rd respondent Authorized Officer to call for report from the 5th Respondent within a time frame on the form 9 application –

Ext P 4 preferred by the petitioner.

iii) Issue a writ of mandamus, any other writ, appropriate order directing the 2nd or 3rd Respondent- Authorized officer consider Ext P 4 and P 5 within a time frame.

iv) Issue a writ of mandamus, any other writ, appropriate order directing the 2nd Respondent or 3rd respondent Authorized Officer to consider and pass orders in Exhibit P4 application (Form 9) after obtaining all necessary inputs within a time frame.

v) Issue a writ of mandamus, any other writ, appropriate order directing the 2nd respondent or 3rd respondent Authorized Officer to call for the scientific report and satellite images as to character and fitness of the property from 8th respondent office through 6th respondent office, within a time frame and allow the same.

vi) This Honourable Court may be pleased to dispense with the translation of the vernacular documents produced in the vernacular language vii) Provide cost of the proceedings.”[sic]

2. The petitioner submitted a Form-6 application and consequently, Ext.P3 fee notice was issued by the authorised officer on 26.08.2025. The petitioner has not paid the fee. Thereafter, the petitioner filed Form-9 as evident by Ext.P4 in physical form. The prayer in this writ petition is to consider Form-9 application.

3. This Court directed the Government Pleader to get instructions. The Government Pleader submitted that the Form-6 application is to be deleted by the petitioner and thereafter, the petitioner has to submit a Form-9 application through online portal, if he wants to consider the same, in accordance with law. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner already submitted Ext.P5. I think that is not a prayer which the petitioner has to submit.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions :

1) The petitioner is free to file an application to the 3rd respondent/authorised officer to delete the Form-6 application and if such an application is filed, the authorised officer will pass appropriate orders within two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

2) After deleting the Form-6 application, the petitioner is free to file a fresh Form-9 application, if he is advised to do so, through online portal.

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