Joy John vs Revenuedivisional Officer
2024 Latest Caselaw 4676 Ker

Kerala High Court

Joy John vs Revenuedivisional Officer on 6 February, 2024

Author: Murali Purushothaman

Bench: Murali Purushothaman

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                          PRESENT
 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
 TUESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 17TH MAGHA,
                            1945
                  WP(C) NO. 3583 OF 2024
PETITIONER/S:

          JOY JOHN,
          AGED 64 YEARS
          S/O ULAHANNAN (LATE), SPRING DALE,
          NEMARA,CHITTURTALUK, PALAKAD, PIN - 678508
          BY ADV KURIAN JOSEPH (ARAKKUNNAM)


RESPONDENTS:

   1      REVENUEDIVISIONAL OFFICER,
          REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE , PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN
          - 678001
   2*     ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE, - REPLACED.
          ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE OFFICE,
          NEMMARA, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678508

          [AS PER ORDER DATED 6.02.2024 IN I.A.1/2024, THE
          2ND RESPONDENT IS REPLACED AS

          AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
          KRISHIBHAVAN,
          NENMARA,
          PALAKKAD -678508]


   3      THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
          NEMMARA VILLAGE OFFICE , NEMMARA, PALAKKAD
          DISTRICT, PIN - 678508



          BY SR.G.P. SMT. AMMINIKUTTY.
    THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 06.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(c) No.3583/2024

                                    2




                Dated this the 6th day of February, 2024

                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner herein is the owner in possession of

an extent of 7.22 Ares of property at Nenmara Village,

Palakkad District.

2. The petitioner has approached this Court

seeking a direction to the 1st respondent, RDO to

consider and dispose of Ext.P3 application in Form 5 filed

under Rule 4(d) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy land

and Wetlands Rules, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as 'the

Rules').

3. Ext.P3 being a statutory application 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 2 nd respondent, the 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 Ext.P3 application, 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 Ext.P3 within the time limit specified

earlier. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this

judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before

the Agricultural Officer concerned for due compliance.

Sd/-

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE al/-.07.02.2024.

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3583/2024

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 . A TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DT: 03/1/24 Exhibit P2 .A TRUE COPY OF POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 20/01/22 Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 5 APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 27/3/2023 Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HONO'BLE CHIEF MINISTER KERALA STATE DATED NIL