IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
UNNEENKUTTY – Appellant
Versus
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER – Respondent
JUDGMENT
This Writ Petition (C) is filed seeking the following reliefs:
" i. a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction to call for the records leading to Exts. P4 & P7 orders and quash the same.
ii. a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction to respondents to allow application submitted by the petitioner under Form 6 of the Act, 2008."
[SIC]
2. Petitioner filed a Form - 6 application in accordance with the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act , 2008 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act 2008'). The same is rejected as per Ext.P4. The petitioner filed an appeal against the same, as evident by Ext.P5. Ext.P6 is the report submitted by the Village Officer, by the which Village Officer recommended for the conversion. But, the Appellate Authority dismissed the same as per Ext.P7. Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed.
3. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Government Pleader.
4. This Court perused Ext.P6 report of the Village Officer. A perusal of the same would show that the Village Officer recommended for conversion. The same is adverted to in Ext.P7 order of the Appellate Authority. But, extracting the re
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.