BEENA Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is stated to be the owner in possession of a property having an extent of 8.10 Ares in Sy. No. 657/3 of Kunnukara Village, covered by Ext. P1 settlement deed No. 3667/2012 of the Sub Registrar Office, Chengamanad has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 2 and 3 to survey and measure the property of the petitioner and dispose of Exts. P2 and P4 applications in accordance with law, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. The further reliefs sought for are a writ of mandamus commanding the 3rd respondent to pass order on Ext. P2 application, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court, in accordance with law; and a writ of mandamus commanding the 2nd respondent to consider Ext. P5 representation.

(2.) On 02.08.2019, when this writ petition came up for admission, this Court noticed that the petitioner is seeking consideration of Ext. P4 application, which is one invoking the provisions under Section 27A of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008, read with sub-rule (13) of Rule 12 of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008, placing reliance on Ext. P3 certificate dated 11.04.2019 issued by the 7th respondent, who is the Secretary of Kunnukara Grama Panchayat. The learned counsel for the petitioner was directed to address arguments with reference to the provisions under sub-rule (13) of Rule 12 of the said rules.

(3.) Thereafter, on 14.08.2019, when this writ petition came up consideration along with W.P(C) No. 21122 of 2019, this Court passed the following order;