Back
2012 Supreme(Online)(KER) 34895
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
S. SIRI JAGAN, J
TONY FRANCIS – Appellant
Versus
CUSTODIAN OF ECOLOGICALLY FRAGILE LAND – Respondent
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) 715/2012
The court established that pending the assessment of legality, administrative procedures for application consideration must proceed promptly.
Headnote:
Forest - Writ Petition - Kerala Forest (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Lands) Act, 2003, Section 3, Section 10(A) - The court directed the acceptance and consideration of applications under Section 10(A) while maintaining the status quo of property for the petitioners.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners filed a writ petition challenging the validity of Section 3 of the Kerala Forest Act and sought orders for their agricultural applications to be accepted and processed, along with a request to maintain the status quo on their properties.
Finding of the Court:
The court ordered the second respondent to accept the applications and consider them as per Section 10(A) of the Act, ensuring action is taken within six months, while maintaining the current status of the properties.
Issues: The main issue revolved around the validity of Section 3 of the Kerala Forest Act and whether the petitioners' applications should be accepted for consideration.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that while it would not pronounce on the validity of Section 3 at this stage, it emphasized the necessity to accept and consider the applications under Section 10(A) expediently.
Final Decision: The petition was disposed of with directions to maintain status quo and process the applications without prejudice.
J U D G M E N T
The petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs:
“i. Declare that Sec.3 of the Kerala Forest (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Land) Act 2003 is untravirus of the constitution.
ii. Call for records leading to Ext.P11 and issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing Ext.P11.
iii. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the
2nd respondent to accept Ext.P12 and P12(a) applications and consider the same in accordance with law and consider and pass orders within six months as situated in Sec.10(A) of the Act and until then direct the respondent 2 onwards not to interfere with the normal agricultural operation and entry of the petitioners to the respective properties covered by Ext.P1, P1(a) and P4.”
But for the present, the petitioners would be satisfied with the 3rd prayer without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to take up the other prayers appropriately at a later time.
I have heard the learned Government Pleader also.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions:
The 2nd respondent shall accept Exts.P12 &
W.P.(C)No.715 of 2012 P12 (a) applications and consider the same in accordance with Section 10 (A) of the Kerala Forest (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Lands) Act, 2003, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Till then, status quo as on today shall be maintained in respect of the properties in question. I make it clear that, this is without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to take up the other contentions again, if necessity arises.
