The court mandates timely consideration of land development applications under conservation laws.

JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

“i. Issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ, direction or order compelling the 2^nd respondent to consider and pass order on merits in Exhibit P5 application affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon’ble Court granting permission to develop the land.

ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ, direction or order declaring that the property of the Petitioner covered by Exhibit P-1 is dry land.

iii. Issue such other writ or direction this Hon’ble court may deem fit to pass in the circumstance of the case.

iv. Dispense with filing of the translation of vernacular documents.” [SIC]

2. The main prayer in this Writ Petition is to consider Ext.P5 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.P5 within a time frame.

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

1. The 2^nd respondent / Authorised O directed to consider Ext.P5 Form-6 application (if it is pending and if it is in order), in the light of the report already received from the 5^th respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. I make it clear that the 2^nd respondent is free to pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law.

2. The petitioner will produce a certified copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this Writ Petition with exhibits, before the 2^nd respondent for compliance.

Sd/-