Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
BENNEY MATHEW – Appellant
Versus
DISTRICT COLLECTOR – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition for writ of mandamus for irrigation. (Para 1) |
| 2. allegation of inaction after the court's prior judgment. (Para 2) |
| 3. court's directive regarding compliance and petition disposal. (Para 3) |
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed with the following prayers:
“i) issue a writ of Mandamus to the 1st respondent to consider Exhibit P1 Judgment dated 3.12.2022.
ii) issue writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to complete the proceedings in furtherance of Exhibit P1 Judgment at the earliest.
iii) Issue writ of Mandamus directing the respondents, 1st respondent to allow the petitioner to take water through the water channels for irrigation of the paddy cultivation.
iv) Grant such other reliefs which this Honourable court may deem fit grant in the facts and circumstances of the court.”
(SIC)
2. The main grievance of the petitioners is that no orders are passed after Ext.P1 judgment.
3. When this writ petition came up for consideration on 10.02.2026, this Court directed the learned Government Pleader to get instruction. Now, the Government Pleader submitted that an order consequent to Ext.P1 judgment is passed on 16.02.2026. If that be the case, this writ petition nee
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
