IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V. KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
VINCY MOHAN – Appellant
Versus
THE 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 the 1st respondent or competent officer to whom the power of the 1st respondent is delegated to consider and pass orders on Exhibit P3 Form 6 application in accordance with law within the shortest time period as possible.
(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 this 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 petitioner submitted that he will be satisfied if a direction is issued to consider Ext.P3 application submitted in Form 6 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. P3 application to
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.