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) 18330

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
B BASANTH – Appellant
Versus
DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LR) – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 6967 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.K.J.MANU RAJ, SMT.GOPIKA ANIL
For the Respondents: SR GP SMT VIDYA KURIAKOSE

The court emphasizes the need for timely administrative action regarding land classification and application processing under relevant statewide regulations.

Headnote:This writ petition challenges the actions taken concerning the petitioner's land. It seeks a writ of mandamus to compel the authorities to adjudicate the petitioner's Form 5 application, asserting that the property in question is not paddy land. The court adheres to the procedural timelines, directing the respondents to act on the applications with due expedience. The final directives include prompt submission of necessary reports and compliance on the part of the petitioner.

Table of Content
1. writ petition seeking relief on administrative action regarding land. (Para 1)
2. counsel expresses willingness to accept a procedural direction. (Para 2)
3. court directs prompt action on pending application. (Para 4)

JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

“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 14.80 Ares of property lying in Survey No.36/15 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 for the petitioner submitted that he will be satisfied if a direction is issued to consider Ext.P1 application submitted in Form 5 under Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008 .

3. Heard the learned Government Pleader also.

4. After hearing both sides, I think that prayer can be allowed.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:

1. The 2nd respondent is directed to submit the necessary report based on the Ext. P1 application to the 1st respondent/Authorised Officer, as 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 Officer is directed 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/-

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