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) 12607

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
THANKAM P – Appellant
Versus
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 6716 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.RANJITH C., SRI.V.GANGADHARAN, SHRI.KIRAN JOHNY, SMT.SHINY GEORGE MEKKATTUKULAM, SMT.SEBI S. RAJ, SHRI.BINJO ANDREWS, SHRI.JOSBIN THOMAS, SHRI.LIBIN P. P.
For the Respondents: GP SMT DEEPA V

The court mandated timely consideration of an application under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act.

Headnote:Statute Analysis: The relevant statute under consideration is the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act and Rules, 2008. Facts of the Case: The writ petition seeks a mandamus for the consideration of Ext.P3 application by the second respondent.

Findings of Court:
The court directed the second respondent to consider the application based on the report from the third respondent.

Issues: The court framed the question of considering the Ext.P3 application.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the application must be processed expeditiously within designated timelines.

Result: The Writ Petition is disposed of with directions regarding the handling of the application.

Table of Content
1. prayer for consideration of application. (Para 1 , 2)
2. hearing of counsel for both sides. (Para 3)
3. court's directive for timely processing. (Para 4)

JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed with following prayers:

i. To issue a Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or order or direction commanding the 2nd Respondent to take up Ext-P3 application submitted by the Petitioner, consider it and pass appropriate orders on the same within a short span of time as this Hon'ble Court thinks fit in the interest of justice.

ii. To pass such other appropriate orders or directions as this Hon’ble Court deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.

iii. Dispense with filing of the translation of vernacular documents (SIC)

2. The main prayer in this Writ Petition is to consider Ext.P3 Form - 6 application filed by the petitioner under Section 27A read with Rule 12(1) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act and Rules, 2008 ('Act and Rules' in short).

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

4. After hearing both sides, I think there can be a direction to consider Ext.P3 within a time frame.

Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of in the following manner:

1. The 3rd respondent is directed to submit the necessary report based on the Ext.P3 application to the 2nd respondent/Authorised O period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

2. The 2nd respondent/Authorised O to consider the Ext.P3 application (if it is pending and if it is in order) based on the report received from the 3rd respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the report. I make it clear that the 2nd 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 respondents 2 and 3 for compliance.

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