IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
RAPPAI – Appellant
Versus
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition filed seeking specific relief. (Para 1) |
| 2. court directed appeal consideration within a time frame. (Para 2) |
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:
“i. call for records leading to Ext.P2 and issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing Ext.P2.
ii. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P1 afresh in view of Ext.P4, within such time as may be fixed by this Hon’ble Court.
iii. issue such other orders, writs or directions as are deemed fit by this Hon’ble Court.
iv. award cost of this proceedings to the petitioner. v. dispense with filing of the translation of vernacular documents produced as Exhibits in the writ petition.”[SIC]
2. Admittedly, Ext.P2 order is an appealable order. Now, the petitioner filed an appeal against Ext.P2 before the 3rd respondent as evident by Ext.P10. If that be the case, I think there can be a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider Ext.P10 appeal within a time frame.
Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of in the following manner:
1. The 3rd respondent is directed to consider Ext.P10, if it is received and pending as on today,
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.