SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 13900

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
MOHANDAS.N.S – Appellant
Versus
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 7202 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.ARUN VALENCHERY
For the Respondents: GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The court mandates timely compliance with application processing under statutory provisions to ensure administrative efficiency.

Headnote:This Writ Petition seeks reliefs under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act and Rules, 2008 pertaining to the implementation of an application. The Court directs the 4th respondent to submit a report regarding the application to the 3rd respondent within a specified time frame, ensuring due process is followed. The main question is the timely consideration of the application based on the report, where the Court emphasizes compliance with the law. The final outcome includes directives for action by the respondents within one month and four months respectively.

Table of Content
1. petition for directive relief regarding application processing. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court reviewed arguments for application consideration. (Para 3)
3. court ordered compliance with specified timelines. (Para 4)

JUDGMENT

This Writ Petition (C) is filed seeking the following reliefs:

" (a) To issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, directing the 3rd and 4th respondents to implement Exhibit P2 application by making necessary changes forthwith in respective BTR maintained by them in compliance of Exhibit P1 order, without insisting production of any original documents or site inspection as early as possible preferably within one month with due communication to the petitioner.

(b) Petitioner also prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to dispense with the English translation of the documents produced in the Vernacular Language.

(c) Such other appropriate order or direction sought for in the course of the proceedings."

[SIC]

2. The main prayer in this Writ Petition is to consider Ext.P2 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.P2 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.P2 application to the 3rd respondent/Authorised O period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

2. The 3rd respondent/Authorised O to consider the Ext.P2 application (if it is pending and if it is in order) based on the report received from the 4th respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the report. I make it clear that the 3rd respondent is free to pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law.

3. The petitioner will produce a certified copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this Writ Petition with exhibits, before the 3rd and 4th respondents for compliance.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top