IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
SUJITH SREENIVASAN – Appellant
Versus
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, THRISSUR – Respondent
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed with the following prayers:
“i) Issue writ of Certiorari, order or direction, quashing Exhibit P7 by finding it as illegal.
ii) Direct the 1st respondent to reconsider and allow the application of the petitioner bearing file No. RDOTSR/2006/2022- DB of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Thrissur, at the earliest or within a time limit fixed by this Hon’ble Court.
iii) Grant such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper by considering the facts and circumstances of the above case.
iv) Dispense with production of English translation of the documents.” (SIC)
2. The petitioner challenged Ext.P7 order in this writ petition. Ext.P7 is an order passed in a Form-6 application filed by the petitioner in accordance to Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules , 2008.
3. Admittedly, Ext.P7 is an appealable order.
The counsel for the petitioner submitted that, he came to know about Ext.P7 only when Ext.P6 notice is received. Ext.P7 order is dated 03.09.2022. Even then, the petitioner can file an appeal with a delay condonation petition. The delay petition can be considered by the appellate authority in the light of the principle la
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.