Disposed

Sonakumari S. v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Kerala HC5 Feb 2019WP(C)/3301/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition concerned the petitioner's application to regularise and utilise her garden land for purposes other than paddy cultivation under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to submit a suitable application in statutory format to the 1st respondent within three weeks, to be considered along with Ext.P6 within three months.

Sonakumari S. Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

TUESDAY ,THE 05TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 16TH MAGHA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 3301 of 2019

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

SONAKUMARI S. AGED 32 YEARS W/O.PRAMODKUMAR, PRAMOD HOUSE, CHERIYALINGAL PARAMBA, CHALAPPURAM P.O., KOZHIKODE-673 002

¶8

BY ADVS. SMT.BIMALA BABY SHRI. JEFRIN JOSE

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER KOZHIKODE-673 001

¶11

2 THE TAHSILDAR, KOZHIKODE TALUK, KOZHIKODE-673 001

¶12

3 THE CONVENER, LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE, KASABA VILLAGE, KOZHIKODE TALUK-673 001

¶13

SRI.MANURAJ.K.J,GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C).No. 3301 of 2019

¶16

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

Petitioner is the owner of an extent of 1.203 Ares of property situate in Survey No.267/1, Block No.10 of Kasaba Village, Kozhikode Taluk, Kozhikode District. According to the petitioner, despite the fact that the property is remaining as garden land, and not included in the data bank constituted as per the provisions of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act 2008' for short, it is still remaining in the village records and BTR as paddy field. Thereupon, now petitioner has submitted Ext.P6 application before the 1^st respondent seeking regularisation and permission for utilisation of the property for other purposes other than paddy cultivation and agricultural operations and seeks direction for early consideration of the same.

¶19

I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader and perused the pleadings and documents on record.

¶20

Learned Government Pleader has pointed out that consequent to the introduction of Rules 2018, to regulate the proceedings under Section 27A of Act 2008 as amended by Act 2018, petitioner may have to submit an application in the statutory format.

¶21

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving open the liberty of the

¶22

WP(C).No. 3301 of 2019

¶23

¶24

petitioner to submit a suitable application before the 1^st respondent in accordance with the Rules within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, which if received shall be considered along with Ext.P6, in accordance with law, at the earliest, and at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of application in the statutory format, taking into account the parameters and stipulations contained under Section 27A of Act 2008, since the petitioner has a case that the property was converted much prior to the introduction of Act, 2008 and is remaining in an irreversible condition as a paddy field and the application is submitted after the appointed date i.e.30.12.2017, on which date the Amendment Act 2018 has come into force. Petitioner is directed to produce copy of the writ petition along with the appendant documents before the statutory authority for appropriate action.

¶25

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

Sd/

SHAJI P.CHALY

JUDGE

Jm/

WP(C).No. 3301 of 2019

¶31

¶32

APPENDIX

¶33

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶34

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED NO.363/2018 OF SRO KOZHIKODE DATED 8/6/2018 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT FOR PAYMENT OF BASIC TAX FOR THE YEAR 2018-19 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 29/11/2018 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 14/12/2018 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY APPLICATION DATED 14/12/2018 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 28/12/2018 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT

Sonakumari S. v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonakumari S. v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohammed Shajahan Vs the Nedumpram Gramapanchyath

Deepa Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

M/S.Um Assets Private Limited, Vs the District Geologist

Visakh M.R., Vs Sri.Tom Jose

G.Anandarajan, Vs Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram

Balu Vs Munnar Grama Panchayat