The petitioner holds an item of land measuri ng 13.23 Ares in Angamaly Village. Although the land of the petitioner is shown in the revenue records as paddy land, the same was lying as a dry land when the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 (the Act) came into force. Since the land of the petitioner was not a cultivable paddy land when the above statute was introduced, the petitioner preferred an application on 08.09.2015 under Clause 6(2) of the Kerala Land Utilization Order for permission to make use of the land for other purposes. On 30.10.2019, in terms of Ext.P2 order, the fourth respondent granted the permission sought for by the petitioner. Thereupon, the petitioner preferred Ext.P3 application before the fifth respondent for reassessing the land as a dry land under the Kerala Land Tax Act and also for making appropriate corrections in the revenue records pertaining to the classification of the land. It is alleged by the petitioner that Ext.P3 application is not being considered by the fifth respondent taking the stand that the request made by the petitioner in Ext.P3 can be considered only if the petitioner obtains
