Allowed

Cherian Varghese v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC10 Nov 2014WP(C)/26057/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought correction of revenue records and permission to use reclaimed land for other purposes near Thirumoolapuram junction. Court distinguished a prior judgment regarding B.T.R. corrections and directed petitioner to approach the Revenue Divisional Officer for utilization permission under Clause 6 of Kerala Land Utilisation Order. Permission to be granted within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to approach Revenue Divisional Officer for permission under Clause 6 of Kerala Land Utilisation Order; permission to be granted within six weeks.

Cherian Varghese Vs State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2014/19TH KARTHIKA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 26057 of 2014 (F)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

CHERIAN VARGHESE, AGED 59 YEARS

¶8

S/O.GEE VARGHESE, CHIRATHAYCKALMADATHIL HOUSE,

¶9

PADINJATTUSSERY HOUMURI, KAVIYOOR VILLAGE.

¶10

SARASAMMA CHERIAN, W/O.CHERIAN VARGHESE, CHIRATHAYCKALMADATHIL HOUSE, PADINJATTUSSERY HOUMURI, KAVIYOOR VILLAGE.

¶11

RENJI GEORGE CHERIAN, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.CHERIAN VARGHESE, CHIRATHAYCKALMADATHIL HOUSE,

¶12

PADINJATTUSSERY HOUMURI, KAVIYOOR VILLAGE.

¶13

BY ADVS.SRI.P.HARIDAS

¶14

SMT.S.SIKKY SRI.P.C.SHIJIN

¶15

RESPONDENT(S):

¶16

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶17

REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, THIRUVALLA TALUK, 689101.

¶18

R1 & R2 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. JOSEPH GEORGE

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10-11-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

P.T.O.

¶21

WP(C).No. 26057 of 2014 (F)

¶22

APPENDIX

¶23

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶24

------------------------------------EXHIBIT-P1: TRUE COPY OF TAX RECEIPT DATED 24.05.2011. EXHIBIT-P2: TRUE COPY OF TAX RECEIPT DATED 24.05.2011. EXHIBIT-P3: TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF DATA BANK. EXHIBIT-P4: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 25.06.2014. EXHIBIT-P5: TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE VILLAGE OFFICER ALONG WITH ANNEXURES DATED 22.08.2014. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

ST/-

A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

¶29

W.P.(C) No.26057 OF 2014

¶30

Dated this the 10^th day of November, 2014

¶31

JUDGMENT

¶32

The petitioners are owners and in possession of property situated in Re-survey Nos.244/14-1, 14-2 and 224/16-1-1 near Thirumoolapuram junction of Thiruvalla Village. The petitioners have approached the Revenue Divisional Officer, Thiruvalla for correction of details in revenue records. The petitioners have also sought a prayer in the above application to utilise the land for other purposes. It is seen from Ext.P5 sketch that this property is situated very close to the MC Road. In B.T.R., these properties are shown as 'nilam'. However, as seen from Ext.P5 report of the Village Officer, these properties are reclaimed land. This is also fortified from the draft Data Bank produced as Ext.P3, wherein it is described as 'reclaimed nilam' as 'purayidom'. Therefore, the property can be classified as 'purayidom'. However, the revenue officials have no power to correct or effect changes in the B.T.R. The petitioners submit that they are entitled for declaration as to classify the property as 'purayidom' in view of the judgment of this court in 'Revenue Divisional Officer, Fort Kochi and others v. Jalaja Dileep and another' (2014 (1) KLT 161) . However, without prejudice to the petitioners' right as above, petitioners submit that their request may be considered in terms of Clause 6 of

¶33

W.P.(C) No.26057/2014

¶34

¶35

the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, for the purpose of utilising land for other purposes.

¶36

The Collector has power under clause (6) of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 (for short, the “KLUO'') to grant permission to utilise such land for any other purposes. The Collector is defined under clause 2(a) of the KLUO which includes the Revenue Divisional Officer as well. Though the property is reclaimed before the enactment of the Act 28 of 2008, nevertheless, if the land in question was under cultivation with any food crop either three years prior to the commencement of the KLUO or after its commencement, permission from the Collector is necessary for utilising the above land for any other purposes. This Court in 'Praveen K. v. Land Revenue Commissioner, Thiruvananthapuram and others' (2010 (2) KHC 499) held as follows:

¶37

“If an application is made under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, the same is not liable to be dismissed before an enquiry is held by the concerned authority under the Act and a finding is entered that the land in respect of which the application made is a paddy land or a wet land. If the land is not found to be paddy land or wetland, application has to be considered as per the provisions of the KLU.”

¶38

W.P.(C) No.26057/2014

¶39

¶40

3. In ' Sunil v. Killimangalam Panjal 5th Ward,

¶41

Nellulpadaka Samooham' (2012 (4) KLT 511 ) another Division Bench of this Court held that permission under clause 6 can be granted for construction of building for industrial purposes also. In Praveen's case (supra) also this court laid down the manner in which an application under clause 6 of the KLUO has to be dealt with by the Collector.

¶42

In ' Joseph John v. Land Revenue Commissioner ' ( 2014 (1) KLT 706 ), it was held that reclamation or conversion of the land is not bar in considering the application under Clause 6 of KLU order.

¶43

Considering the nature of lie of the property, which is lying near to the M.C Road, I am of the view that permission can be granted to utilise the land for other purposes. Therefore, the petitioners shall approach the Revenue Divisional Officer, Thiruvalla for permission to utilise the land in terms of Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order. This shall be done within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On receipt of the above application and after imposing necessary conditions if so warranted, permission shall be granted to the petitioners within a further period of six weeks.

¶44

W.P.(C) No.26057/2014

¶45

¶46

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶47

Sd/-

¶48

A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE .

¶49

//true copy//

¶50

P.S. To Judge

¶51

st/-

Cherian Varghese v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Cherian Varghese 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sasikumar Nambiar Vs the Nodal Officer

Uthuppu Vs the District Collector

Dr.Sabila a. Vs Kerala Public Service Commission

V.K.Sukumaran Vs Union of India

Paulose Vs the Kerala State Pollution Control Board

Abdul Shareef Vs the Passport Officer