Dismissed

Prasanth Bhattathiri v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Oct 2023WA/1810/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal against Single Judge's dismissal of a declaration petition under Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land & Wet Land Act. Court upheld findings, finding no reason to interfere, while granting liberty to authorities to act if violations occur.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed; liberty granted to respondents 2 to 10 to take action if 11th respondent violated statutory provisions.

Prasanth Bhattathiri Vs State of Kerala — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

WA No.1810 of 2023

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. A.J.DESAI

¶6

¶7

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶8

TUESDAY, THE 17^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 25TH ASWINA, 1945

¶9

WA NO. 1810 OF 2023

¶10

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT in WP(C) 5909/2023 OF HIGH COURT OF

¶11

KERALA

¶12

APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

¶13

PRASANTH BHATTATHIRI AGED 43 YEARS S/O JAYANARAYANAN BHATTATHIRI, VADAKKE MOODAMBADI ILLAM, RAMAPURAM, KEERIKKAD, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 690508

¶14

BY ADVS. GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL) NIMESH THOMAS MANU SRINATH

¶15

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN THE WRIT PETITION:

¶16

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001

¶17

2 DISTRICT COLLECTOR COLLECTORATE, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688001

¶18

3 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, CHENGANNUR, PIN - 689121

¶19

4 TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, KARTHIKAPPALLY, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 690516

¶20

5 VILLAGE OFFICER, VILLAGE OFFICE, KEERIKKAD, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 690502

¶21

6 AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KEERIKKAD, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 690502

¶22

7 DIRECTOR, FISHERIES DEPARTMENT, DISTRICT OFFICE, ALAPPUZHA, PIN

¶23

WA No.1810 of 2023

¶24

¶25

688001

¶26

8 DEPUTY DIRECTOR, FISHERIES DEPARTMENT, DISTRICT OFFICE, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688001

¶27

9 PATHIYOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, PATHIYOOR, ALAPPUZHA -REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN - 690508

¶28

10 SECRETARY, PATHIYOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, PATHIYOOR, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 690508

¶29

11 JAMES MATHEW, MADATHIPARAMBIL, KEERIKKAD P.O., ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 690508

¶30

OTHER PRESENT:

¶31

SR.GP.T.K.VIPINDAS; ADV. N.V.VINAY FOR R11

¶32

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶33

WA No.1810 of 2023

¶34

¶35

A. J. Desai, C.J. &

¶36

V.G. Arun, J.

¶37

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

¶38

W.A. No.1810 of 2023

¶39

Dated this the 17^th day of October 2023

¶40

JUDGMENT

¶41

A.J. Desai, C.J.

¶42

By way of the present writ appeal filed under Section 5 of the Kerala High Court Act, the appellant challenged the judgment dated 14/09/2023 in the captioned writ petition by which the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed by the present appellant. In the writ petition, the appellant/petitioner has prayed for a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the second respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P10 representation filed by the petitioner. Learned Single Judge, after having gone through the reply affidavit filed by the party respondents and other official respondents, dismissed the writ petition. Hence, this appeal.

¶43

Learned Counsel for the appellant would submit that, some

¶44

action was taken by the respondents concerned only after filing of the writ petition. Drawing our attention to certain provisions of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land & Wet Land Act, 2008, learned Counsel would submit that further action is required to be taken.

¶45

Learned Advocate appearing for the 11^th respondent has

¶46

WA No.1810 of 2023

¶47

¶48

opposed this appeal and submitted that 11^th respondent is following the relevant Rules and is doing the work in accordance with law. Counsel would further submit that the appeal is liable to be dismissed.

¶49

We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties and gone through the documents and the report submitted by the learned Government Pleader. We have also perused the judgment impugned in this appeal.

¶50

Apart from the observations made by the learned Single Judge, liberty is granted to respondents 2 to 10 i.e. the Government Authorities, to take action against the 11^th respondent if the activities carried out by him are against the statutory provisions. In this appeal, we too, within the limited powers available, examined the factual aspects and find no reason to interfere with the findings in the impugned judgment. However, as observed by the learned Single Judge, it would be open to the 2^nd respondent to take appropriate action in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned.

¶51

The writ appeal is dismissed accordingly.

¶52

Sd/-

¶53

A. J. Desai Chief Justice

¶54

Sd/-

¶55

V.G. Arun Judge

¶56

dpk

Prasanth Bhattathiri v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prasanth Bhattathiri v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Meera R. Bhat, Vs State of Kerala

Ousephachan.P.P Vs State of Kerala

Mohammed Hussain Vs State Bank of India

Joseph Fencer Vs State of Kerala

P.J. Navas Vs the Branch Manager

Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority, Vs Dr. Xavier Mathew