Disposed

Anish C v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Dec 2017WP(C)/3358/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court permitted the petitioner to file an application under Clause 6(2) of the Kerala Land Utilization Order for permission to use his property, which was recorded as rubber plantation in the Act's Data Bank, for other purposes including construction, subject to specific procedural directions.

What did the court decide?

Permitted the petitioner to prefer an application under Clause 6(2) of the Kerala Land Utilization Order to use the property for other purposes.

Anish C Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2017/10TH AGRAHAYANA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 3358 of 2017 (T)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

ANISH C., SREE NILAYAM BHOOTAMKARA,ELAMANNOOR P.O, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.UNNI. K.K. (EZHUMATTOOR)

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001

¶11

2. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001

¶12

3. DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH PANCHAYATH DIRECTORATE, PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDING MUSEUM P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶13

4. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR PATHANAMTHITTA 689 645

¶14

5. ENADHIMANGALAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY ENADHIMANGALAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH ENADHIMANGALAM P.O 691 524

¶15

WP(C).No. 3358 of 2017 (T)

¶16

6. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER OFFICE OF THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,

¶17

ADOOR, 691 10

¶18

7. AGRICULTURAL OFFICER KRISHI BHAVAN ENADHIMANGALAM 691 524

¶19

R1 TO R4, R6, R7 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.K. MANOJ R5 BY ADVS. SRI.K.SHAJ .SRI.RENJIT GEORGE

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01-12-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

sdr/-

¶22

WP(C).No. 3358 of 2017 (T)

¶23

APPENDIX

¶24

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶25

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPTS SHOWING THE DETAILS OF THE PROPERTY

¶26

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE DATA BANK ISSUED UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT

¶27

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER

¶28

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

NIL

/TRUE COPY/

PA TO JUDGE

sdr/-

ANU SIVARAMAN, J.

¶34

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.3358 of 2017

¶35

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

¶36

Dated this the 1^st day of December, 2017

¶37

JUDGMENT

¶38

Petitioner owns an item of property. It is stated that the said property was converted as a garden land several years prior to the introduction of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 ('the Act'). It is alleged by the petitioner that in the Data Bank prepared in terms of the Act, the property is shown as 'rubber' The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition is that since the property is described as 'Nilam' in the revenue records, in the light of the provisions contained in the Act, he is unable to use the property for other purposes. The petitioner, therefore, seeks appropriate directions in this writ petition so as to enable him to use the property for other purposes including for construction of buildings.

¶39

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader.

¶40

If the property of the petitioner is included in the Data Bank prepared under the Act as rubber plantation, the

¶41

WPC 3358/17

¶42

¶43

provisions of the Act would not apply to the same and if the provisions of the Act do not apply to the property of the petitioner, he is entitled to make use of the property for other purposes, after obtaining permission of the competent authority under Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order, 1967. However, it is seen that the petitioner has not preferred any application till date before the competent authority under the Land Utilization Order, viz, the sixth respondent for permission to use the property for other purposes.

¶44

In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to prefer an application invoking clause 6(2) of the Kerala Land Utilization Order before the sixth respondent, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If the petitioner prefers an application before the sixth respondent as directed above, the said authority shall pass orders on the same, in the light of the decision of this Court in Puthan Purakkal Joseph v. Sub Collector (2015(3) KLT 182). The 6 th respondent shall obtain a report from the Convenor of the

¶45

WPC 3358/17

¶46

¶47

concerned Local Level Monitoring Committees under the Act to the effect that the property concerned is not shown as paddy land or wetland in terms of the data bank prepared under the Act. It is also directed that the 6 th respondent shall consider the application, after issuing notice to the petitioner, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the report from the Agricultural Officer. In the light of the decision of this Court in Shivadasan v. Revenue Divisional Officer (2017(3) KLT 822), the direction aforesaid shall be complied with, untrammelled by the directions contained in the Circular No.46848/P1/2016 of the Government dated 22.12.2016. If the request of the petitioner aforesaid is granted, the petitioner shall be issued building permit to construct building in the property, if he is otherwise entitled for the same. Needless to say that if the request of the petitioner under Clause 6 of the Land Utilization Order is granted, the petitioner will be entitled to move the authorities under the Kerala Land Tax Act for fresh assessment of the land as garden land and if such a request is made by the petitioner, the same shall also be considered by the said

¶48

WPC 3358/17

¶49

¶50

authorities, in the light of Kizhakkambalam Grama

¶51

Panchayat v. Mariumma (2015(2) KLT 516), within one month from the date of the request.

¶52

Sd/- Anu Sivaraman, Judge

¶53