IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
DEVIKUTTY – Appellant
Versus
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER – Respondent
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed with following prayers :
“I. Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction directing first and fourthto consider and pass order on Exhibit P4 expeditiously with in a time frame.
II. To dispense with filing of the translation of Vernacular Documents.
III. Allow the Writ petition with costs.
IV. Grant such other further reliefs which tis Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct in the facts and circumstances of the case. “ [sic]
2. When this writ petition came up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that they will be satisfied if a direction is issued to consider Ext.P4 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 4th respondent is directed to submit the necessary report based on the Ext. P4 application to the 1st respondent/Authorised Officer, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of rec
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.