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) 22998

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V. KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
BUSHARA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 24371 OF 2020



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.S.SREEKUMAR, SRI.K.C.BALAGOPAL, SMT.V.BEENA, SRI.M.SREERANGA NADHAN, SRI.S.NAVAS, SRI.ANAND B. MENON
For the Respondents: SR GP SMT PREETHA K K

Judicial review promotes effective administrative action while ensuring statutory compliance in land development matters.

Headnote:The Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 governs the rights related to land use. The petitioner seeks a mandamus to compel respondents to consider applications for land development and declare land suitable for construction. The court concluded the petition lacks grounds for retention as alternative relief is available under existing statutory provisions. Hence, the petition is disposed of.

Table of Content
1. petitioner seeks to compel government action on land applications. (Para 1 , 2)

JUDGMENT

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

"I. Issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ, direction or order compelling the 2nd and 3rd respondents to consider and pass order on merits in Exhibit-P7; Exhibit P-8 applications affording opportunity of hearing the petitioners’ within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon’ble Court granting permission to develop the land.

ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ, directions or order declaring that the property of the Petitioners’ covered by Exhibit P-1 is a dry land and suitable for construction.

iii. Issue such other writ or direction this Hon’ble Court may deem fit to pass om the circumstances of the case.”

[SIC]

2. The main prayer in this Writ Petition is to consider Exts.P7 and P8 applications. This Writ petition is pending before this Court from 09.11.2020. No interim order has been passed in this case.

3 I am of the considered opinion that this Writ is need not be retained here. If any existing grievance is there to the petitioner, the petitioner can take steps in accordance with the provisions of the he Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act , 2008.

With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of.

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