IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V. Kunhikrkshnan, J
ISMAIL K.P. – Appellant
Versus
THE SUB COLLECTOR, TIRUR – Respondent
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:
“a) Call for the records leading up to Ext. P7 order and quash the same by issuance of a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction.
b) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to remove the property covered by Ext. P1 document from the data bank as per Ext. P3 application, within a time stipulated by this Hon'ble Court, c) Pass an order dispensing with the production of English translation of vernacular document while filing of Writ Petition.
and d) Pass any other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to issue and the petitioner may pray from time to time.” [SIC]
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the 1st respondent rejecting the Form–5 application submitted by him 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
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.