Partly allowed

Joby M C v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC16 Dec 2019WP(C)/13206/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, petitioners challenged a condition imposed under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order (KLU) to pay fees under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act. Relying on Geo Peter, the Court held that applications made before 30.12.2017 remain governed by the KLU, not the Paddy Land Act. Consequently, the condition was declared unsustainable and set aside.

What did the court decide?

The impugned condition requiring payment of fee under Section 27A(3) of the Paddy Land Act was set aside, and petitioners were permitted to use the order without delay.

Joby M C Vs State of Kerala — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.13206 OF 2018(A)

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1 JOBY M C

¶8

S/O. CHAKKUNNY, AGED 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT MUNDADAN HOUSE KOTTEKKAD, P.O KUTTUR, THRISSUR - 680 013.

¶9

2 DENIL JOHN

¶10

S/O. JOHNY, AGED 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKATTIL HOUSE,KOTTEKKAD, KUTTOOR, THRISSUR - 680 013.

¶11

BY ADVS.

¶12

SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON SRI.P.S.APPU SRI.A.R.NIMOD

¶13

RESPONDENTS:

¶14

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT,SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶15

2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR COLLECTORATE, THRISSUR - 680 001.

¶16

3 THRISSUR CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CORPORATION OFFICE,THRISSUR - 680 001.

¶17

4 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER OFFICE OF THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,THRISSUR - 680 001.

¶18

5 THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER, AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,THRISSUR - 680 001.

¶19

BY SRI. SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL, SC

¶20

OTHER PRESENT:

¶21

GP - SMT. POOJA SURENDRAN

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16.12.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

WP(C).No.13206 OF 2018(A)

¶24

¶25

J U D G M E N T

¶26

The petitioners impugn the condition imposed in Ext.P11 order to pay the fee under Section 27A(3) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 ('the Paddy Land Act' for short) issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO for short), under the provisions of Kerala Land Utilisation Order (KLU for short), asserting that the said condition could not have been imposed in the said order because it relates only to an application under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act ((herein after referred to as 'the Paddy Land Act' for short).

¶27

The petitioners submit that, as has been declared by this Court in Geo Peter v. Revenue Divisional Officer, Muvattupuzha & Another [2019(4) KHC 400] , an application under the KLU order made before 30.12.2017 can only be considered under the ambit of the said Order and not under the Paddy Land Act and therefore, that conditions, which is impugned therein, is unsustainable and untenable in law.

¶28

In response, the learned Government Pleader submits that even though the petitioners' application was made on 06.12.2017 , Ext.P11 was issued much later, on 04.04.2018. He

¶29

WP(C).No.13206 OF 2018(A)

¶30

¶31

says, therefore, that the conditions, as imposed therein, which also incorporates those permitted under Section 27A of the Act, are permissible and prays that the order be left uninterdicted.

¶32

Even when I hear the learned Government Pleader on

¶33

the afore lines, it is now well settled through the judgment in Geo Peter (supra) that when an application, which is preferred before 30.12.2017, is considered by the RDO, he can only do so within the confines of the KLU Order and cannot impose any condition as are permitted under the Paddy Land Act. I, therefore, find favour with the petitioners' contention that the impugned condition is untenable and unsustainable in law.

¶34

In the afore circumstances, I order this writ petition and set aside the impugned condition in Ext.P11 order and permit the petitioners to use the said order in any manner that they may choose fit as per law, and on production of the certified copy of this judgment, the Secretary of the 3^rd respondent Corporation will be obligated to consider his application for building permit without any avoidable delay.

¶35

I make it clear that based on this judgment, the petitioners will also apply to the concerned Tahsildar appropriately under the Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961 within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment; in which event, the

¶36

WP(C).No.13206 OF 2018(A)

¶37

¶38

said application will be considered without any further delay thereafter.

¶39

This writ petition is thus ordered.

¶40

SD/-

¶41

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶42

JUDGE

¶43

¶44

WP(C).No.13206 OF 2018(A)

¶45

¶46

APPENDIX

¶47

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶48

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, CHEMBUKKAVU VILLAGE TO THE 1ST PETITIONER DATED 5.1.2015.
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, CHEMBUKKAVU VILLAGE TO THE 2ND PETITIONER DATED 17.6.2016.
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONERS DATED 3.1.2017.
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN L.A.A NO.1138/1998 ON THE FILE OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT DATED 5.6.2002.
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE DECREE IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.6161/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DATED 22.4.2009.
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE GAZETTE NOTIFICATION NO.13430/08 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA DATED 14.12.2009.
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE AGRICULTURAL FIELD OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN, THRISSUR DATED 14.7.2014.
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF THE LAND ACQUISITION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, CHEMBUKAVU DATED 7.6.2014.
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 6.12.2017.
EXHIBIT P10	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.4465/2017 ON THE FILE OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT DATED 13.3.2018.
EXHIBIT P11	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 4.4.2018.
EXHIBIT P12	TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN W.P(C) NO.12058/2018 ON THE FILE OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT DATED 6.4.2018.

Joby M C v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Joby M C 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V.v.Raman, Vs State of Kerala

Jose John Vs the District Collector

M/S. Confident Projects India Pvt.Ltd Vs the State of Kerala

Ramachandran Vs Kulukkallur Grama Panchayath

Orange Tree Properties Vs State of Kerala

Pourasamithi,Rep by Its Secretary Vs District Collector,Malappuram