The court emphasizes the timely consideration of applications under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act.

JUDGMENT

This Writ Petition (C) is filed seeking the following reliefs:

" i) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ order or direction directing 3^rd respondent to regularize the plan and issue the occupancy certificate to the petitioner’s building situated in Sy.No.4/2-8 in Block No.133 of Changanacherry Village, ChanganacherryTaluk, Kottayam District, within a time limit.

ii) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ order or direction directing 5^th and 6^th respondents to correct the revenue records by deleting the entry of the petitioner’s property in Sy.No.4/2-8 in Block No.133 of Changanacherry Village, ChanganacherryTaluk, Kottayam District from the Data Bank within a time limit."

[SIC]

2. When this writ petition came up for consideration on 10.06.2025, this Court passed the following order:

" The learned Government Pleader seeks time to file a counter affidavit. She also submits that, as per the report of the Agricultural Officer, the petitioner’s property can be excluded from the data bank. Ext.P6 application (Form-5) is pending consideration before the 6^th respondent, the same would be considered as per seniority.

2. On consideration of the facts and materials on record, I am satisfied that the petitioner is entitled to an interim order. Hence, I direct the 6th respondent to consider Ext.P6 application, in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within sixty days from the date of production of a copy of this order before the 6^th respondent. The 6^th respondent shall directly inspect the property or call for a report from the Kerala State Remote Sensing and Environment Centre (KSREC), as contemplated under Rule 4 (4f) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy land and Wetland Rules, 2008, if he feels necessary."

3. Based on the above order, it is submitted that a Form - 5 application has already been allowed, as evident by Ext.P10. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted Ext.P11 Form - 6 application in accordance with the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as, " the Act 2008"). The same has not been considered and therefore, the petitioner's occupancy certificate application has also not been considered by the 3^rd respondent is the grievance.

4. Heard counsel for the petitioner, the Standing Counsel appearing for the Municipality. I also heard the Government Pleader.

5. After hearing both sides, I think, there can be a direction to consider Ext.P11 Form - 6 application, and based on the decision in that application, there can be a direction to the 3^rd respondent to do the needful.

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

1. The 5^th respondent is directed to submit the necessary report based on the Ext.P11 application to the 6^th respondent/Authorised O period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

2. The 6^th respondent/Authorised O to consider the Ext.P11 application (if it is pending and if it is in order) based on the report received from the 5^th respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the report. I make it clear that the 6^th respondent is free to pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law.

3. The petitioner will produce a certified copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this Writ Petition with exhibits, before the 5^th and 6^th respondents for compliance.

4. Based on the decision in Ext.P11 Form - 6 application, the petitioner can submit appropriate application through K-smart for obtaining occupancy certificate and to number the building, and if such an application is filed, the 3rd respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate order