JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

“i) Call for the records leading to Ext P3 order and issue a Writ of Certiorari to quash Ext P3 order.

ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, commanding the 2nd respondent Deputy Collector (L.A), Palakkad to reconsider and dispose of the Form 5 application a fresh as per law at the earliest; and iii) Grant the petitioner such other reliefs which this Hon’ble court deems fit in the circumstance of the case.” [SIC]

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P3 order passed by the 2^nd respondent rejecting Ext.P2 Form–5 application submitted by the petitioner under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules , 2008 (‘Rules’, for brevity). The main grievance of the petitioner is that the authorised officer has not considered the contentions of the petitioner.

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

4. This Court perused the impugned order. I am of the considered opinion that the authorised officer has failed to comply with the statutory requirements. The impugned order was passed by the authorised officer solely based on the report