Remanded

Jose Joseph v. the Thahasildar

Kerala HC4 Oct 2013WP(C)/19424/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenging land classification sought directions on property status under Kerala Land Reclamation Act 2008. Court directed District Collector to ascertain land type and pass orders on pending representation within two months, citing prior precedents on Data Bank registration.

What did the court decide?

Directing the District Collector to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P9 within two months, ascertaining if the property is paddy or wet land.

Jose Joseph Vs the Thahasildar — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2013/12TH ASWINA, 1935

¶5

WP(C).No. 19424 of 2013 (C) ----------------------------

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

-----------

¶8

1. JOSE JOSEPH, S/O.LATE AVIRAH JOSEPH, KOTTUVELITHARAYIL (PONNEZHATH),PATTANAKKAD P.O. CHERTHALA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶9

2. TOMY JOSEPH, S/O.LATE AVIRAH JOSEPH KOTTUVELITHARAYIL (PONNEZHATH), PATTANAKKAD P.O. CHERTHALA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶10

3. SONY JOSEPH,S/O.LATE AVIRAH JOSEPH, KOTTUVELITHARAYIL (PONNEZHATH), PATTANAKKAD P.O. CHERTHALA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶11

BY ADVS.SRI.B.PRAMOD

¶12

SMT.R.REJI (ATTINGAL)

¶13

RESPONDENTS :

¶14

-----------

¶15

1. THE TAHSILDAR CHERTHALA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶16

2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER VALAYAR EAST VILLAGE OFFICE, CHERTHALA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶17

ADDL.R3 IMPLEADED :

¶18

3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,ALAPPUZHA

¶19

ADDL.R3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT. 4/10/2013 IN IA.NO.12938/2013

¶20

R1 TO R3 BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.K.SOYOUZ

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04-10-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

¶23

WP(C).No. 19424 of 2013 (C)

¶24

APPENDIX

¶25

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶26

----------------------

¶27

EXHIBIT	P1: TRUE COPY OF THE WILL DEED DT.5-2-2007 REGISTERED IN THE SUB REGISTRAR'S OFFICE WITH REG.NO.26/2007.
EXHIBIT	P2: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DT.25-3-2013.
EXHIBIT	P3: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DT.27-3-2013 UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT.
EXHIBIT	P4: TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DT.27-3-2013.
EXHIBIT	P5: TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DT.5-4-2013.
EXHIBIT	P6: TRUE COPY OF THE PRINT OUT OF THE WEB PAGE OF THE OFFICIAL WEBSITE.
EXHIBIT	P7: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT.11-4-2013 IN WPC 10469/2013.
EXHIBIT	P8: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT.9-5-2013 SUBMITTED BEFORE R1.
EXHIBIT	P9: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT.06-6-2013 PASSED BY R1.

¶28

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS & ANNEXURES :

¶29

ANNEXURE R1(a): COPY OF THE REPORT DT 10/6/2013.

//TRUE COPY//

P.A TO JUDGE

BPp

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶34

========================

¶35

W.P.(C). No. 19424 of 2013

¶36

-------------------------------------------Dated this the 4th day of October, 2013

¶37

JUDGMENT

¶38

The petitioners are owners of the property comprised in Sy

¶39

Nos. 145/3B, 145/4 and 145/11 of Vayalar East Village, Cherthala Taluk covered by Ext.P1 Will deed. According to the petitioners, the said property is a 'dry land' and is not a 'paddy land' or 'wet land' as per the definition under Sections 2(xii) and 2(xviii) of the Act 28 of 2008 and further, it is not included as 'paddy land' in the Data Bank register. However, there is an observation by the 1st respondent in Ext.P9 that, the reclamation

¶40

has been effected contrary to the provisions of the above Act and hence it was forwarded to the District Collector, so as to act in tune with the 'Act 28 of 2008'.

¶41

Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.

¶42

After hearing both the sides, this Court finds that, the matter requires to be considered and finalized by the District Collector. It has to be ascertained whether the property is actually a 'paddy land' or 'wet land' as defined under Act 28 of 2008 and if not, it is liable to be considered under the KLU Order, so as to enable the petitioners to make use the property for any

¶43

other purposes. It is also relevant to note that, by virtue of the

¶44

W.P.C. No. 19424 of 2013 -2-

¶45

law declared by this Court in Jafarghan v . K.A. Kochumakkar & Others (2012 (1) KLT 491) , if the property is not included in the Data Bank Register as a 'paddy land' or 'wet land' on the date of commencement of the Act, no proceedings under the Act 28 of 2008 will lie in respect of such property.

¶46

In the said circumstance, the additional 3rd respondent,

¶47

before whom Ext.P9 is now stated as pending, is directed to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P9 in the light of the observations made by the Division Bench of this Court in the decision rendered in Praveen K. v. Land Revenue Commissioner, Thiruvananthapuram & Others ( 2010 (2) KLT 617). This shall be done with notice to the petitioners at the earliest, at any rate within 'two months' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶48

The petitioners shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the additional 3rd respondent for further steps.

¶49

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.

¶50

kp/-

Jose Joseph v. the Thahasildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jose Joseph v. the Thahasildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kana Kizhakkeveetil Kunhikrishnan Vs the Appellate Authority

N.Aboobacker Vs the District Collector and Others

Palanadan Mohammed Vs the District Collector

K.V. Krishnakumar Vs M.S. Jaya

Aleena Achi Joseph Vs the Commissioner for Entrance Examination

Muhammed Sabir Vs State of Kerala