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) 7377

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
BAGYARATHNAM – Appellant
Versus
THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER COLLECTORATE – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 3848 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.MANAVI MURALEEDHARAN, SMT.ANJANA K.P.
For the Respondents: SRI. K.JANARDHANA SHENOY, GP

The court mandated timely consideration of statutory applications under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008.

Headnote:This writ petition addresses the legal duty of competent authorities under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008, specifically regarding the timely consideration of statutory applications under Rule 4(d). The petitioner filed Form 5 on 19.01.2026, yet no report was provided by the Agricultural Officer nor a decision taken by the Revenue Divisional Officer. The court directed the Agricultural Officer to submit a report within 30 days and the first respondent to decide within three months, ensuring compliance with established timelines. The final disposition compels adherence to these directions.

Table of Content
1. the petitioner filed an application seeking a mandatory report. (Para 1 , 2)
2. the court directs compliance with statutory deadlines for decision-making. (Para 3 , 4)
3. finalization of the writ petition orders further actions by respondents. (Para 5)

JUDGMENT

Petitioner claims that she had filed an application in Form 5 under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules , 2008 (for short ‘the Rules’), a copy of which is produced as Ext.P4.

2. According to the petitioner, though the application was filed on 19.01.2026, neither has the report been submitted by the Agricultural Officer nor has any decision been taken by the 1st respondent.

3. Form 5 application filed by the petitioner is a statutory application as per Rule 4(d) of the Rules. The Competent Authorities therefore, have a legal duty to consider the said application in accordance with law within a reasonable time. Hence, there will be a direction to the 4th respondent to submit a report as per the Rules.

4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of with a direction to take a decision on Ext.P4 application in a time-bound manner.

5. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 4th respondent to submit a report as contemplated under Rule 4(e) of the Rules, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Pursuant to the receipt of the said report, the 1st respondent shall take a decision on Ext.P4 application within three months thereafter. The timeline specified above shall strictly be complied with by the respective officers.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

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