Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 31669
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.Kunhikrishnan, J
K. Alamelu – Appellant
Versus
Revenue Divisional Officer – Respondent
WP(C) No. 18110 of 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: C.A. Chacko, C.M. Charisma
For the Respondents: Deepa V
The statutory authority is mandated to consider and dispose of applications for land conversion under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008, within a time-bound and reasonable period.
Headnote:The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the statutory authority to consider a pending Form-6 application submitted under the provisions of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act and Rules, 2008. The petitioner sought for a time-bound disposal of the application which remained pending before the Revenue Divisional Officer. The court addressed the issue of whether the authority had an obligation to decide upon the pending land conversion application within a reasonable time frame. The court reasoned that in the absence of procedural obstacles, the statutory authority is bound to process such applications in accordance with established rules and within a stipulated period. The court disposed of the petition by directing the relevant authorities to process the application and pass appropriate orders within a specified time frame.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks judicial intervention for the consideration of a pending statutory application. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. the court issued directions for time-bound disposal of the pending application by the statutory authorities. (Para 3 , 4) |
JUDGMENT
The above Writ Petition (C) is filed with the following prayers:
"i) issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P2 Form-6 application submitted by the petitioner forthwith, in a time bound manner;
ii) issue such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case; &
iii) petitioner also prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to dispense with production of translation of the documents produced in vernacular language."
[SIC]
2. The main prayer in this Writ Petition is to consider Ext.P2 Form - 6 application submitted 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 Ext.P2 within a time frame.
Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of in the following manner:
1. The 4th respondent is directed to submit the necessary report based on the Ext. P2 application to the 1st respondent/Authorised O period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.
2. The 1st respondent/Authorised O to consider the Ext.P2 application (if it is pending and if it is in order) based on the report received from the 4th 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 1st 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 1st and 4th respondents for compliance.
