Rajesh vs The District Collector, Thrissur
2022 Latest Caselaw 229 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 21ST POUSHA, 1943
                       WP(C) NO. 21501 OF 2011
PETITIONER:

               RAJESH, AMMASAM VEETTIL MUKKATTAYIL,
               ANDATHODU P.O.,
               THRISSUR DISTRICT,, PIN-679 564.
               BY ADV SMT.R.SUDHA


RESPONDENTS:

    1          THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR
               THRISSUR, PIN-680 001.
    2          THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
               THRISSUR, PIN-680 001.
    3          PUNNAYOORKULAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH
               REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,,
               PUNNAYOORKULAM, PIN-679 561.
    4          THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
               PUNNAYOORKULAM, PIN-679 561.
    5          APPUKKUTTAN S/O.KORU
               MAMPATTA HOUSE, ANDATHODU P.O.,,
               THRISSUR-679 564.
               BY ADV SMT.C.M.CHARISMA



               BY GP SRI.JOSHI THANNICKAMATTOM



        THIS    WRIT   PETITION     (CIVIL)    HAVING    COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION       ON   11.01.2022,    THE     COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No. 21501 of 2011
                                     2



                    MOHAMMED NIAS. C.P.,J
              ------------------------
                 WP(C) No. 21501 of 2011
              ------------------------
           Dated this the 11th day of January, 2022

                             JUDGMENT

The petitioner complaints of filling up of the paddy

fields by the 5th respondent in contravention of the Kerala

Conservation of Paddy Lad and Wet Land Act, 2008. It is

alleged that due to the continuous filling, the entire area

surrounding the petitioner's house is waterlogged.

Alleging the same, the petitioner has submitted

representation, marked as Ext.P1(a) before the second

respondent-RDO. The petitioner prays for disposal of

Ext.P1(a) representation. I find the request of the

petitioner to be reasonable.

2. In such circumstances, there will be a direction

to the second respondent-RDO to look into the allegations

made in Ext.P1(a) with notice to the affected parties and

take appropriate decisions, in accordance with law, within WP(C) No. 21501 of 2011

a period of four months' from the date of receipt of a copy

of this judgment. The petitioner will also produce a

certified copy of this judgment as well as the writ petition

with all the exhibits before the said respondent so as to

enable him to take a decision as aforesaid.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

MOHAMMED NIAS. C.P.,JUDGE dlK 11.01.22 WP(C) No. 21501 of 2011

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21501/2011

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT-P1- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION GIVEN BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT DATED 16.07.2011 EXHIBIT-P1(a)- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION GIVEN BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 16.07.2011 EXHIBIT-P2- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION GIVEN BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 12.07.2011 EXHIBIT-P3- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 20.07.2011 ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT PANCHAYATH TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT-P4- TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION GIVEN BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT DATED 1.8.2011