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
9 paragraphs · 197 wordsSathish Ninan, J
Finding illegal filling up of paddy land and the formation of a way, the third respondent passed Ext.P3 order in terms of Section 13 of the Kerala
Conservation of Paddy land and Wetland Act, directing restoration of the property. Challenging the said order the petitioners have preferred Ext.P4
revision before the first respondent in terms of Section 28 of the Act. The revision is to be heard and disposed of by the second respondent. The
revision petition is pending consideration. The petitioners apprehend that pending the revision the order impugned might be implemented.
I am of the opinion that, the disposal of the revision could be expedited and till then the status quo is to be maintained.
Accordingly, without expressing anything on merits, the writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to consider and pass orders on
Ext.P4 revision, with due notice to and after hearing the petitioners, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of three months from
the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Let status quo in respect of the property be maintained by both sides in the meanwhile.