SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 6454

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
VIJU ABRAHAM, J
JUBIN JOSEPH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.M.R.JAYALATHA
For the Respondents: GP SRI. RIYAL DEVASSY

JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ext.P14 proceedings issued by the 2nd respondent District Collector, invoking the power under Section 13 of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act, 2008’).

2. The learned Government Pleader pointed out that, there is a statutory remedy of filing a revision under Section 28 of the Act, 2008, to which the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the order passed by the District Collector is illegal, inasmuch as the authority who heard the petitioner is, the Deputy Collector(LR) and the order is passed by the District Collector, which is impermissible. The learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the judgment of this Court in Sanija A. v. State of Kerala and others [2020 (4) KHC 301] in support of his contention. The learned counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of this Court that as per Ext.P12 notice, the hearing was scheduled to be held before the Deputy Collector(LR), who heard the petitioner.

3. Heard both sides.

4. Taking into consideration the above facts and circumstances, I am of the view that the 2nd respondent District Collecto

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top