Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 18833
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V. KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
KALEEKKAL THOMAS VARGHESE – Appellant
Versus
THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVT SECRETERIATE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 9816 OF 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.P.SAREENA GEORGE, SMT.AVILA VICTORIA, SHRI.JOEL LIJU FRANCIS
For the Respondents: SMT DEEPA V
Court directs timely consideration of application related to land classification and trees, emphasizing adherence to procedural timelines.
Headnote:This judgment addresses a writ petition concerning the petitioner's request for a directive on the consideration of an application (Exhibit P3) regarding la...
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition filed for mandamus concerning land classification. (Para 1) |
| 2. court hears submission for a directive on application. (Para 2) |
| 3. court considers the request and decides on procedural compliance. (Para 3 , 4) |
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed with following prayers:
i) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 3rd and 6th respondents to consider and pass orders on Exhibit P 3 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 2 Ares 92 Square Meter of land lying in Re Survey 45/37, Nadama Village, Kanayannur Taluk, Ernakulam District covered by a Partition Deed bearing No. 626/2025 of Thripunithura Sub Registry is not paddy land.
iv) Dispense with the translation of vernacular documents.
v) Issue such other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case.
(SIC)
2. When this Writ Petition came up for consideration, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner will be satisfied if a direction is issued to consider Ext.P3 Form – 5 application within a time frame.
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.P3 application within a time frame.
Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of in the following manner:
1. The 6th respondent is directed to submit the necessary report based on the Ext.P3 application to the 3rd 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 3rd respondent/Authorised O directed to consider Ext.P3 application (if it is pending and if it is in order) based on the report received from the 6th respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of four months 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 respondents 3 and
6 for compliance.
