Philip Mathew vs The District Collector
2021 Latest Caselaw 7099 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                           PRESENT

         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

MONDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 10TH PHALGUNA, 1942

                  WP(C).No.5202 OF 2021(A)


PETITIONER:

              PHILIP MATHEW, AGED 64 YEARS
              S/O.MATHAI, MANAMMEL HOUSE, KURISUMOODU P.O.,
              CHANGANASSERY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

              BY ADVS.
              SHRI.GEORGE SEBASTIAN
              SRI.ARUN LUCKOSE ABRAHAM

RESPONDENTS:

     1        THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
              COLLECTORATE, KOTTAYAM-KUMILY RD,
              KOTTAYAM, PIN-686002.

     2        THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
              THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
              KOTTAYAM, PIN-686002.

     3        THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE OF
              VAZHAPPALLY GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
              REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER, THE AGRICULTURAL
              OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN, VAZHAPPALLY,
              KURISUMOODU P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-
              686103.

     4        THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
              KRISHI BHAVAN, VAZHAPPALLY, KURISUMOODU P.O.,
              KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686104.
 W.P.(C) No.5202 of 2021           2


       5      THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
              THE VILLAGE OFFICE, VAZHAPPALLY WEST VILLAGE,
              KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686104.


OTHER PRESENT:

              GP. RAVI KRISHNAN

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP          FOR
ADMISSION ON 01.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME          DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.5202 of 2021                   3


                        W.P.(C) No.5202 of 2021
                 -----------------------------------------------


                              JUDGMENT

Ext.P6 is the statutory appal preferred by the petitioner

against Ext.P5 order invoking Section 27B of the Kerala

Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008. The grievance

of the petitioner in the writ petition concerns the delay on the part

of the first respondent in considering the said appeal. The

petitioner, therefore, seeks appropriate directions in this regard in

the writ petition.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as

also the learned Government Pleader.

Having regard to the fact that Ext.P6 is a statutory

appeal, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition

directing the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P6

appeal with notice to the petitioner. Ordered accordingly. This

shall be done within six weeks.

Sd/-

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.

ds 01.03.2021

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 10.02.2003 BEARING NUMBER 371/03 OF CHANGANASSERY SUB REGISTRY, IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 23.10.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 22.01.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 28.10.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10.08.2020 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL DATED 07.09.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE CHALAN DATED 08.09.2020.

EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE REMINDER DATED 19.01.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.