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) 51762

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V. Kunhikrishnan, J
SREEDEVI RAJEEV – Appellant
Versus
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 27159 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: M.S. Shamla, Elizabeth V. Joseph
For the Respondents: Muhammed Hashim

The court directed the revenue authorities to process an application for changing the nature of land under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008, within a stipulated time frame.

Headnote:(A) Land Revenue - Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 - Application for change of nature of land - Direction to authorities to consider Form 6 application within a specified time frame. (Para 4)

Issues: Whether the respondents can be directed to consider the petitioner's application for changing the nature of the property in revenue records.

Table of Content
1. request for land nature correction under the kerala conservation of paddy land and wetland act. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. court's determination to provide a time-bound direction for administrative action. (Para 4)

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.08.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

P.V. KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.

--------------------------------

W.P.(C.).No.27159 of 2026

----------------------------------------------

Dated this the 07th day of August, 2026

JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed with following prayers:

i. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ order or direction to 2nd respondent to pass orders on Exhibit P5 Form 6 Application;

ii. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents 2 and 3 to take appropriate steps to correct/change the nature/tenure of the petitioner’s property in the Revenue Records and BTR as that of residential Property /Purayidam.

iii. To dispense with the production of the English translation of Exhibits which are in vernacular language;

iv. To issue such other writ, order or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

(SIC)

2. The main prayer in this Writ Petition is to consider Ext.P5 Form - 6 application 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 Ext.P5 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.P5 application to the 2nd respondent/Authorised O period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

2. The 2nd respondent/Authorised O to consider the Ext.P5 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 2nd 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 respondents 2 and 4 for compliance.

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