IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
LOULY – Appellant
Versus
DEPUTY COLLECTOR (L R) – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 7494 OF 2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition for mandamus to direct consideration of application. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court's directive for timely action on the petitioner's application. (Para 3 , 4) |
JUDGMENT
The above Writ Petition (C) is filed with the following prayers:
"i) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Exhibit P1 Form 5 application of the petitioner after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner within a time limit fixed by this Hon’ble Court;
ii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to remove petitioner’s property from data bank iii) Declare that the property of the petitioner lying in 13.27 Ares of property lying in Survey No.36/2 of Vengola village in Kunnathunad Taluk, Block No.20, Ernakulam District is not a paddy land.
iv) issue such other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case.
V) Dispense with the production of English translation of the vernacular Exhibits produced in the Writ Petition [c]."
[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.
P1 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.P1 application within a time frame.
Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of in the following manner:
1. The 2nd respondent is directed to submit the necessary report based on the Ext.P1 application to the 1st respondent/Authorised O expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.
2. The 1st respondent/Authorised O to consider Ext. P1 application (if it is pending and if it is in order) based on the report received from the 2nd respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the report.
3. The petitioner will produce a certified copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this Writ Petition with exhibits, before the 1st and 2nd respondents for compliance.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE DM
PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 5 APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
Judgment reserved
NA
Date of judgment
26.02.2026
Judgment dictated
26.02.2026
Draft Judgment Placed
27.02.2026
Final Judgment Uploaded
28.02.2026
1ST RESPONDENT DATED 13.1.2024 EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF FORM 5 APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 13.1.2024 EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED
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.