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) 13068

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
BABU – Appellant
Versus
THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LR) – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 4357 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.K.R.PRATHISH
For the Respondents: GP SMT PREETHA K K

Procedural timelines for considering applications under environmental conservation rules must be adhered to by the authorities.

Headnote:The judgment addresses a writ petition seeking a mandamus direction for the consideration of an application under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008. The court determined that the third respondent must generate a report on the application within one month and the authorized officer must decide on it within three months, thereby fulfilling the petitioner's request promptly. The court's findings establish the procedural requirements for such applications under the specified rules. The petition is allowed, directing necessary actions for compliance.

Table of Content
1. court sets timelines for report and application decisions. (Para 4)

JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers :

“i) Issue a of writ of mandamus or appropriate direction to the 1strespondent to consider the Ext.P2 application of the petitioner and remove the entry of petitioner’s property from data Bank within a time frame fixed by this Hon’ble court.

ii) Dispense with filing of the translation of documents in Malayalam produced in the above writ petition.

iii) Pass such other writs, orders or directions as this Hon'ble Court may deems just, fit and necessary in the facts and circumstances of this case. And iv) Allow the writ petition writ petition with cost “ [sic] 2. When this writ petition came up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he will be satisfied if a direction is issued to consider Ext.P2 application submitted in Form 5 under Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules , 2008.

3. Heard the learned Government Pleader also.

4. After hearing both sides, I think that prayer can be allowed.

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

1. The 3rd respondent is directed to submit the necessary report based on the Ext. P2 application to the additional 4th respondent/Authorised Officer, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

2. The additional 4th respondent/Authorised Officer is directed to consider Ext. P2 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 three months from the date of receipt of the report.

3. The petitioner will produce a certified copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this Writ Petition with exhibits, before the 3rd and additional 4th respondents for compliance.

Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE SKS

Judgment reserved NA
Date of Judgment 20/02/2026
Judgment dictated 20/02/2026
Draft judgment placed 24/02/2026
Final judgment uploaded 24/02/2026
PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED

27.01.2026 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER FOR THE YEAR 2025-2026 IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 5 APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER DATED

17.06.2025

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