IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
REMY JOHN MOONTHUNGAL – Appellant
Versus
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER – Respondent
JUDGMENT
The above Writ Petition (C) is filed with the following prayers:
"I. Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction directing the first respondent and fourth respondent to consider and pass order on Exhibit P10 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 appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner will be satisfied if a direction is issued to consider Ext.P10 Form – 5 application within a time frame.
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.P10 application within a time frame.
Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of in the following manner:
1. The 4th respondent is directed to submit the necessary report based on the Ext.P10 application to the 5th respondent/Authorised Officer, as expeditiousl
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.