Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 31661
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.Kunhikrishnan, J
Varghese Painuthura – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
WP(C) No. 18016 of 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Avaneesh Koyikkara, Manjusha K.U., Ashwin Sunil Kumar, Nandana Suresh
For the Respondents: Deepa
The High Court may issue a mandamus to statutory authorities to ensure the time-bound disposal of pending land conversion applications filed under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act to prevent undue administrative delay.
Headnote:The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the authorities to consider applications filed under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 for the change of nature of unnotified land. The petitioner sought an expedited consideration of these applications by the relevant revenue authorities. The Court, upon hearing the parties, found it appropriate to direct the concerned authorities to process the pending applications within a specified timeframe. The main issue was whether the pending Form-6 applications submitted by the petitioner pursuant to S.27A of the Act read with R.12(1) of the Rules required an order for time-bound disposal. The court held that such applications warrant a clear direction for consideration to ensure administrative efficiency and adhere to statutory procedural norms without impeding the applicant's rights. The writ petition was disposed of by directing the Village Officer to submit the necessary reports to the Authorized Officer within one month, and for the latter to consider and pass appropriate orders on the applications within four months from the receipt of the report.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks judicial intervention for pending statutory applications. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. court directs authorities to process land conversion applications within a time frame. (Para 4) |
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:
“i. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction, commanding the 3rd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders in Exhibit P4 and Exhibit P5, the Form 6 applications for change of nature of unnotified land without insisting on any fee, after strictly following the procedures prescribed in law, within a time frame of two months or such period as this Hon’ble Court may fix;
ii. Pass any other orders or directions that this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of Justice;
iii. Dispense with the translation of the documents produced in the vernacular language;
And iv. Award cost.” [SIC]
2. The main prayer in this Writ Petition is to consider Exts.P4 and P5 Form-6 applications 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 Exts.P4 and P5 within a time frame.
Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of in the following manner:
1. The 5th respondent is directed to submit the necessary report based on Exts.P4 and P5 Form-6 applications to the 3rd respondent / Authorised Officer 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 Exts.P4 and P5 Form-6 applications (if it is pending and if it is in order) based on the report received from the 5th respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the report. I make it clear that the 3rd 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 3rd and 5th respondents for compliance.
