Disposed

Musthafa, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC6 Feb 2019WP(C)/3551/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the 8th respondent to finalize the petitioner's application for removal from the data bank within three months. It also directed the 3rd respondent to consider the petitioner's regularization application within three months if enabling orders are produced, and the Municipality to reconsider building permit applications accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Direction to 8th respondent to finalize application within three months; direction to 3rd respondent and Municipality to consider applications/orders within three months.

Musthafa, Vs State of Kerala — 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

WEDNESDAY,THE 06TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 17TH MAGHA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 3551 of 2019

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

MUSTHAFA, AGED 40 YEARS S/O AHMMEDKUTTI, 12, AREEKKADAN DREAM LAND, PERUMUKHAM, RAMANATTUKARA, KOZHIKODE.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY AND AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶11

2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION ROAD, ERANHIPAALAM, ERANHIPPALAM, KOZHIKODE-673001.

¶12

3 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KOZHIKODE-673001.

¶13

4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, FEROKE VILLAGE, KOZHIKODE.

¶14

5 SECRETARY,

¶15

FEROKE MUNIPALITY, FEROKE P.O., KOZHIKODE-673631.

¶16

6 FEROKE MUNICIPALITY, REP. BY IT SECRETARY, FEROKE P.O., KOZHIKODE-673631.

¶17

7 AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN, FEROKE, KOZHIKODE-673631.

¶18

8 THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE, CONSTITUTED UNDER THE KERALA CONSERATION OF PADDY LAND AND WETLAND ACT, REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER, FEROKE, KOZHIKODE-673631.

¶19

R1 TO R4,R AND 8 - SRI.MANURAJ.K.J,GOVERNMENT PLEADER R5 AND R6 - SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN,SC

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

WP(C).No. 3551 of 2019 2

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

Petitioner is the owner of an extent of 8.903 ares of property comprised in Sy No. 114 of Feroke Village. According to the petitioner despite the fact, the property remaining as a garden land, it is included in the data bank constituted as per the provisions of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy land and wet land Act, 2008 (herein after referred to as the Act, 2008) and remaining in the Village Records and the Basic Tax Register as paddy field. Thereupon now, petitioner has submitted Ext.P9 application before the 8^th respondent seeking removal of the property from the data bank and Ext.P8 application before the 3^rd respondent seeking regularization and utilization of the property for other purposes other than paddy cultivation and agricultural operations, seeks direction for early disposal of the same.

¶24

It is also pointed out that, in the

¶25

interregnum even though an application is submitted seeking building permit, it was rejected as per

¶26

WP(C).No. 3551 of 2019 3

¶27

Ext.P5 order assigning the reason that, since the

¶28

property is included in the data bank and remaining

¶29

in the village Records and Basic Tax Register as

¶30

paddy field, the application cannot be considered.

¶31

I have heard learned counsel for the

¶32

petitioner and the learned Government Pleader and perused the pleadings and documents on record. Learned Government Pleader submitted that,

¶33

consequent to the introduction of Rules, 2018 to regulate the proceedings under Section 27A of the Act, 2008, petitioner may have to submit an application before the 3^rd respondent in the

¶34

statutory format. It is also pointed out that, the application will have to be considered applying the parameters and stipulations contained under Section

¶35

27A of the Act 2008. Since the petitioner himself has a case that, the property was converted prior to the introduction of the Act, 2018, the application

¶36

was submitted after the appointed date I.e.

¶37

30.10.2017 and the property is remaining in an irreversible condition as a paddy field, I find

¶38

WP(C).No. 3551 of 2019 4

¶39

force in the contentions advanced by the learned Government Pleader.

¶40

Having evaluated the situation, there will be a direction to the 8^th respondent to finalise Ext.P9 application at the earliest possible and at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If the

¶41

petitioner is producing necessary enabling orders along with an application in the format, the 3^rd respondent shall consider Ext.P8 along with statutory application in accordance with law, and attain finality at the earliest, and at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of the application in the format, applying the principles and stipulations contained under Section 27A of the Act, 2008. Petitioner is directed to produce copy of the writ petition along with documents before the statutory authorities for appropriate action.

¶42

Needless to say if the petitioner is producing necessary orders in accordance with the directions made above, the building permit application

¶43

WP(C).No. 3551 of 2019 5

¶44

submitted by the petitioner shall be reconsidered by the secretary of the Municipality in accordance with law, also taking into account the orders produced as directed above.

¶45

The writ petition is disposed of, accordingly.

Sd/-

SHAJI P.CHALY

JUDGE

hmh

WP(C).No. 3551 of 2019 6

¶51

APPENDIX

¶52

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶53

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 30.1.17

¶54

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT DATED 14.6.2016

¶55

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAN EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 12.7.17 EXHIBIT P6 PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING LIE OF PETITIONER'S PROPERTY

¶56

EXHIBIT P7 PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE RESIDENTIAL BUILDING EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION BEFORE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 1.2.2019

¶57

EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION BEFORE THE 8TH RESPONDENT

¶58

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBIT NIL

Musthafa, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Musthafa, 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Visakh M.R., Vs Sri.Tom Jose

G.Anandarajan, Vs Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram

Balu Vs Munnar Grama Panchayat

Latha Vs the District Collector

Immanual Thomas, Vs the Local Level Monitoring Committee

Prabhu, Vs the Local Level Monitoring Committee for the Pirayiri Panchayat