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) 16237

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V. Kunhikrishnan, J
Saniya Mohammed Babu – Appellant
Versus
The Authorised Officer under the Paddy Land and Wet Land Act – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 8963 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shri Saigi Jacob Palatty
For the Respondents: Sr GP, Smt Vidya Kuriakose

Authority must consider applications under conservation laws within specified timelines to ensure compliance with legal frameworks.

Headnote:This writ petition seeks directions regarding a Form 6 application filed under Section 27A of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act 2008. The court orders that the necessary report be submitted and the application be considered within specified time frames. The directive emphasizes compliance with the law in determining the application. The judgment confirms the obligation for designated officials to act expeditiously on the matter.

Table of Content
1. relief sought regarding application processing. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court hears arguments from both sides. (Para 3)
3. court's directive on timely consideration. (Para 4)

JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

“i. To issue a writ of mandamus order or other appropriate writ or direction directing the 1st respondent, Revenue Divisional Officer to consider and pass orders on Ext. P2, Form 6 application, numbered as 9/2025/1077213 dated 28.05.2025 under Section 27 A of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act 2008 forthwith.

ii. To issue a writ of mandamus or direction to the 2nd respondent Tahsildar to reassess the property under section 6A of the Kerala Land Tax Act consequent to the orders passed by the 1st respondent on Ext. P2 application and to make additional entries in the BTR showing the nature of the property as Garden land/ Purayidam.

Iii. To issue any other writs order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit on the facts and circumstances of the case.

iv. Petitioner may be permitted to dispense with the filing of translation of the vernacular documents.” [SIC]

2. The main prayer in this Writ Petition is to consider Ext.P2 Form-6 application filed 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 4th respondent is directed to submit the necessary report (if not already submitted), based on Ext.P2 Form-6 application, to the 1st respondent / Authorised Officer within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

2. The 1st respondent / Authorised O directed to consider Ext.P2 Form-6 application (if it is pending and if it is in order) based on the report received from the 4th respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the report. I make it clear that the 1st 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 1st and 4th respondents for compliance.

Sd/-

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