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) 14086

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
SWAATHI JOSEPH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 7394 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.PEEYUS A.KOTTAM
For the Respondents: SMT. DEEPA V

Court directed timely consideration of application under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, ensuring compliance with statutory provisions.

Headnote:The petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus for timely consideration of an application under Section 27A and Rule 12(1) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 regarding 2.23 Ares of property. The court instructs the authorities to consider the application expeditiously, ensuring appropriate orders based on the law. The final directive emphasizes the obligation of the respondents to act based on the provided application and report within specified time limits.

Table of Content
1. petition for timely consideration of application. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court's directive on authority's actions and time limits. (Para 3 , 4)

JUDGMENT

The above Writ Petition (C) is filed with the following prayers:

"i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and thereby command the 3rd respondent Deputy Collector (RR)/Revenue Divisional Officer to take a decision on Ext P2 Form 6 application pertaining to petitioner’s 2.23 Ares of property in Sy.No.152/7A-3 of Edappally South Village in Kanayannoor Taluk Ernakulam District within a stipulated time as fixed by this Honourable Court.

ii) Grant such other reliefs which are just and necessary in the interest of justice &

iii) To dispense with production of English translation of documents."

[SIC]

2. The main prayer in this Writ Petition is to consider Ext.P2 Form - 6 application submitted 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 5th respondent is directed to submit the necessary report based on the Ext.P2 application to the 3rd respondent/Authorised Officer within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

2. The 3rd respondent/Authorised O directed to consider the Ext.P2 application (if it is pending and if it is in order) based on the report received from the 5th 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 5th respondents for compliance.

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