Devaprasad vs Bar Council Of Kerala

Sathish Ninan, J

The petitioners confine their relief in the writ petition in so far as it relates to the right of the first petitioner, and seek for permission to reserve the

rights of the second petitioner to initiate fresh proceedings. Permission is granted.

As of now, all that the first petition seeks for is, an expeditious consideration of Ext.P12 application filed by him in form No.9 of the Kerala

Conservation of Paddy land and Wetland Rules, seeking change of nature of the land referred to therein. It is his contention that the property in

question had been lying as a dry land even much prior to the coming into force of the Kerala Land Utilization Order and that there are old buildings

aged more than 75 years situated in the property. Even in the data bank, the classification of the property is “converted landâ€, submits the

petitioner.

Without expressing anything on merits, the writ petition is disposed of directing the third respondent to consider Ext.P12 application (Form No.9) and

pass appropriate orders thereon, on verifying the relevant records including the data bank, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period

of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The 1st petitioner shall be afforded opportunity of hearing and to place materials in

support of his claim.