Disposed

Sruthimol S., v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Kerala HC18 Nov 2020WP(C)/25296/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the Revenue Divisional Officer to dispose of pending applications for removing land from the data bank and granting utilization permission after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. The orders must be passed within three months.

What did the court decide?

Directing the first respondent to dispose of Ext.P2 and Ext.P3 applications within three months after hearing the petitioner.

Sruthimol S., Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 27TH KARTHIKA, 1942

¶5

WP(C).No.25296 OF 2020(J)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SRUTHIMOL S., AGED 32 YEARS W/O.RAJISH.R, PUNNAKKAD HOUSE, ERATTAKULAM P.O, PALAKKAD,PIN-678682

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN SRI.K.V.WINSTON SMT.ANU JACOB

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-678001

¶11

2 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ALATHUR VILLAGE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-678541

¶12

3 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER FOR THE ALATHUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-678541

¶13

4 THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE FOR THE ALATHUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT CONSTITUTED UNDER THE CONSERVATION OF PADDY LAND AND WETLAND ACT, 2008 REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER, THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, ALATHUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-678541

¶14

BY ADV.SRI.PAUL ABRAHAM VAKKANAL, GP

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C).No.25296 OF 2020(J)

¶17

¶18

W.P.(C) No.25296 of 2020

¶19

J U D G M E N T

¶20

Ext.P2 is an application preferred by the petitioner in Form No.5 of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules (the Rules) for removal of the property of the petitioner referred to in the writ petition from the data bank prepared in terms of the Kerala conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 (the Act). Ext.P3 is another application preferred by the petitioner in Form No.6 of the Rules for permission to utilize the said land which is an un-notified land in terms of the Act, for other purposes. The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition concerns the inaction on the part of the first respondent in taking a decision on Ext.P2 and Ext.P3 applications.

¶21

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

¶22

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the first respondent to take up and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2 in accordance with law, if the same is received and pending, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. Ordered accordingly.

¶23

WP(C).No.25296 OF 2020(J)

¶24

¶25

Needless to say that if Ext.P2 application is allowed, orders shall be passed by the first respondent simultaneously on Ext.P3 application as well. This shall be done within three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition by the petitioner. If the applications directed to be disposed of are found defective, the defect shall be intimated to the petitioner by the first respondent immediately on production of a copy of this judgment, and the first respondent will be entitled to avail the time taken by the petitioner to cure the defects in the applications also, for compliance of the directions contained in this judgment. It is made clear that the hearing in terms of this judgment can either be physical or through video conference.

Sd/-

P.B.SURESH KUMAR

JUDGE

WP(C).No.25296 OF 2020(J)

¶31

¶32

APPENDIX

¶33

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶34

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE SURVEY SETTLEMENT REGISTER SHOWING THE NATURE OF THE LAND COMPRISED IN SURVEY NO.12 OF VAZHAPALLY EAST VILLAGE WHICH WAS USING AS PUBLIC ROAD. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION ALONG WITH ITS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DATED 13.11.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 5(4)(I) OF THE CONSERVATION OF PADDY LAND AND WETLAND ACT, 2008 SEEKING TO REMOVE THE PROPERTY FROM THE LAND DATA BANK FOR THE ALATHUR PANCHAYAT.

¶35

EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 13.11.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESIDING UNDER SECTION 27A OF THE CONSERVATION OF PADDY LAND AND WETLAND ACT, 2008

¶36

//TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

Sruthimol S., v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sruthimol 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

Shahid Vs the Village Officer

Swapna Jambhekar Vs the Corporation of Cochin

Johnson K.P., Vs Eloor Municipality

Rafeeq Vs the District Collector Malappuram

Binu Cherian Vs State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority (Seiaa Kerala)

Jayaraman Vs the District Collector