The court mandated a reconsideration of the Form – 5 application under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008, emphasizing adherence to established judicial procedures.

JUDGMENT

The above Writ Petition (C) is filed with the following prayers:

"I. To pass a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ Order or Direction, calling for the entire records pertaining to Exhibit P6 Order, quash and set aside the same;

II. To pass a Writ of Mandamus or any appropriate Writ Order or Direction, directing the 1^st Respondent, Revenue Divisional O – Muvattupuzha to consider Exhibit P5 – Form 5 Application afresh, by evaluating the situation on the basis of the KSREC Report and exclude the property from the Data Bank;

III. To dispense with the filing of English translation of vernacular documents produced herewith;

IV. To pass such Order or Direction, deemed fit and proper according to the facts and circumstances of the Case."

[SIC]

2. The petitioner filed a Form – 5 application in accordance with the the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules , 2008 (‘Rules’, for brevity). The same was rejected. The petitioner challenged the same before this Court, and this Court set aside the order and directed the authorised officer to reconsider the matter. Thereafter, the Form – 5 application was again rejected as per Ext.P6 order.

Aggrieved by the same, this Writ Petition is filed.

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

4. This Court perused Ext.P6 order. After narrating the facts and the directions of this Court, the Revenue Divisional Officer observed that there is nothing to reconsider the Form – 5 application. This is not the manner in which a Form – 5 application is to be considered. This Court in Vinumon v. District Collector [2025 (6) KLT 275] considered the manner in which a Form – 5 application is to be considered. I am of the considered opinion that the matter is to be reconsidered by the authorised officer once again.

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

1. Ext.P6 order is set aside.

2. The 1^st respondent/authorised o directed to reconsider the Form – 5 application in the light of the dictum laid down by this Court in Vinumon’s case (supra), as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

Sd/-