AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
5 paragraphs · 270 wordsMurali Purushothaman, J
The petitioner is the owner in possession of an extent of 31.60 Ares of land, comprised in Sy.Nos.407/4 & 407/5 and 9.80 Ares in Sy.No.407/6 in Block No.33 of Airapuram Village, Kunnathunadu Taluk, Ernakulam District.
The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to the 2nd respondent, the Revenue Divisional Officer, to consider and dispose of Exts.P2 & P3 applications in Form 5 filed under Rule 4(d) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy land and Wetland Rules, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules’).
Exts.P2 & P3 being statutory applications under the Rules, the competent authorities have a bounden duty to consider the same in accordance with law within a reasonable time.
Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 4th respondent/Agricultural Officer, to submit a report as contemplated under Rule 4(e) of the Rules to the RDO within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The RDO shall dispose of Exts.P2 & P3 applications, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the report from the Agricultural Officer. The timelines as above shall be strictly complied with by the respective officers. In case the report has already been submitted by the Agricultural Officer, the RDO shall dispose of Exts.P2 & P3 within the time limit specified earlier. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment, along with a copy of the writ petition, before the Agricultural Officer for due compliance.