Allowed

Martin v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC27 Jan 2021WP(C)/11563/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the rejection of a building permit application. The court held that Section 27A of the Conservation Act does not apply to land covered by pre-existing Land Utilisation Order permissions. It also relied on a prior judgment declaring Rule 12(17) unenforceable, quashing the impugned order and directing the Panchayat to grant the permit.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order Ext.P10 is quashed and the fourth respondent is directed to grant the building permit applied for by the petitioner within three weeks.

Martin Vs State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 7TH MAGHA, 1942

¶5

WP(C).No.11563 OF 2019(U)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

MARTIN

¶8

AGED 53 YEARS SON OF PAILY, ALAKKADAN HOUSE, OKKAL.P.O., CHELAMATTOM, KUNNATHUNAD.

¶9

BY ADV. SMT.K.P.SANTHI

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶12

2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM-682030.

¶13

3 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MOOVATTUPUZHA-686661.

¶14

4 THE SECRETARY, OKKAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT, OKKAL.P.O., ERNAKULAM-683550.

¶15

R1 TO R3 BY ADV.SRI.K.J.MANURAJ,GP R4 BY ADV. SRI.TONY THOMAS (INCHIPARAMBIL)

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C).No.11563 OF 2019(U)

¶18

¶19

W.P.(C) No.11563 of 2019

¶20

J U D G M E N T

¶21

Petitioner holds, along with others, an item of land measuring 15.50 Ares situated within the limits of Okkal Grama Panchayat. The land referred to above is one shown in the revenue records as 'Nilam'. With a view to make use of the land for other purposes, the petitioner obtained Ext.P4 permission under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967. The petitioner, thereupon, preferred an application for building permit to the Panchayat. The application has been rejected by the fourth respondent, the Secretary of the Panchayat as per Ext.P10 order, taking the stand that the petitioner has to obtain permission from the competent authority under Section 27A of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 (the Act). It is also stated in Ext.P10 order that since the petitioner has obtained permission under the Kerala Land Utilization Order prior to Act 29 of 2018, in terms of which Section 27A was introduced to the Act, the petitioner has, at any rate, to pay the fees provided for under Rule 12(17) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008 (the Rules). Ext.P10 order is under challenge in the writ petition.

¶22

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

¶23

WP(C).No.11563 OF 2019(U)

¶24

¶25

It is now trite that Section 27A of the Act cannot be applied to cases where the land is covered by orders passed under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order on applications instituted prior to the coming into force of Section 27A of the Act. Further, in Sealand Builders Pvt.Ltd v. Revenue Divisional Officer , 2020 (5) KLT 56, this court has declared Rule 12(17) of the Rules as unenforceable.

¶26

In the circumstances, Ext.P10 is quashed and the fourth respondent is directed to grant the building permit applied for by the petitioner, if the application of the petitioner is otherwise in order. This shall be done within three weeks.

Sd/-

P.B.SURESH KUMAR

JUDGE

WP(C).No.11563 OF 2019(U)

¶32

¶33

APPENDIX

¶34

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶35

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE DATED 1.1.2014 S	PETITIONER'S APPLICATION UBMITTED TO 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE DATA BANK.	RELEVANT PAGES OF DRAFT
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE VALUE REGISTER.	RELEVANT PAGE OF THE FAIR
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE THE REVENUE DIVI MOOVATTUPUZHA.	ORDER DATED 27.3.2015 OF SIONAL OFFICER,
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE THE VILLAGE OFFI	REPORT DATED 24.3.2015 OF CER, OKKAL.
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE 7.10.2016 SUBMIT	APPLICATION DATED TED TO 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICER FILED IN	REPORT OF THE AGRICULTURAL WPC.NO.38795 OF 2016.
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF THE OF 2016 OF THIS	JUDGMENT IN WPC.NO.38795 HONOURABLE COURT.
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY OF THE SUBMITTED TO THE	REQUEST DATED 15.3.2019 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P10	TRUE COPY OF THE THE 4TH RESPONDE	LETTER DATED 19.3.2019 OF NT.

¶36

//TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

Martin v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Martin 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

Abdul Rahman Afiyab Vs the Secretary

Aswathy.P Vs Union of India

Bijin.P.R Vs the Kerala State Election Commission

T.G.Santhosh Vs State of Kerala

Sumathi Vs B.Ajitha

Sreelakshmi Pradeep Vs the District Collector