A petitioner can seek acceptance of an appeal despite delays when appropriate conditions are met according to established legal principles.

JUDGMENT

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

"(i) issue a writ of mandamus or appropriate writ order or direction commanding the 1^st respondent to accept Exhibit P-5 appeal on record by permitting the petitioner to pay the requisite fee stipulated under Section 27B(2) of Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act , 2008 and to dispose Exhibit P-5 appeal within a time frame stipulated by this Hon’ble Court;

(ii) Dispense with filing of the translation of vernacular documents; and (iii) such other order or direction deems fit and proper for this Hon’ble Court in facts and circumstances of the case."

[SIC]

2. Aggrieved by Ext.P4 order of the 2^nd respondent, the petitioner filed Ext.P5 appeal before the 1st respondent.

According to the petitioner, the 1^st respondent is not accepting the same stating that the appeal is time barred.

Hence this Writ Petition is filed.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

4. After hearing both sides, I am of the considered opinion that, if an appeal is filed, that is to be accepted by the 1st respondent. If there is any delay in filing the appeal, that can be condoned in the light of the principle laid down by this Court in Udayan Vasudevan v. District Collector, Trivandrum [2025 (2) KHC 103] .

Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of in the following manner:

1. The petitioner is free to submit Ext.P5 appeal aginst Ext.P4 before the 1^st respondent in accordance with the law after remitting the necessary fee, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

2. If such an appeal is filed, the 1st respondent will consider the same and pass appropriate orders in it after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the appeal.

3. If there is any delay in filing the appeal, the same should be condoned in the light of the principle laid down by this Court in Udayan Vasudevan’s case (supra).