Writ petition challenging the demand for fee and partial approval of land conversion. Court found fee demand unsustainable and set aside order, directing reconsideration.
Impugned order No.1130/2021 set aside; 2nd Respondent directed to reconsider application and pass fresh orders within two months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 16TH KARTHIKA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 20784 OF 2022
PETITIONER
B.VINODKUMAR
AGED 59 YEARS
S/O BALABHADRAN, KRISHNAVILASOM, CMC-18, CHERTHALA P.O,
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
T.JAYAKRISHNAN
R.KRISHNAKUMAR (CHERTHALA)
RESPONDENTS:
1 DISTRICT COLLECTORALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. COLLECTORATE, ALAPPUZHA2 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, ALAPPUZHA-686 5753 TAHASILDHAR,CHERTHALA, TALUK OFFICE, CHERTHALA-688 524.
4 VILLAEGE OFFICER, CHERTHALA SOUTH VILLAGE OFFICE, CHERTHALA SOUTH, ALAPPUZHA- 688SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN SR.GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO.20784 OF 2022
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 7th day of November, 2022
The petitioner is owner of 17.26 Ares of property in Survey No.7 in Block No.63 of Cherthala South Village of Cherthala Taluk in Alappuzha District. The property was shown as ‘Nilam (paddy land)’ in Revenue records. The property is not included in the Data Bank. The petitioner, however, submitted applications in Form-5 and Form-6 seeking to remove the land from Data Bank and to change the nature of land in Revenue records.
WP(C) NO.20784 OF 2022
was for change in the nature of 17.26 Ares of property. The Revenue Divisional Officer has permitted to change the nature in respect of only 4.19 Ares of property. Furthermore, there is
an exemption from payment of fee available under the Rules, if the land is less than 25 Cents. Ext.P15 order has been passed only in respect of 4.19 Ares of property, which will be less than 25 Cents. Therefore, there is no reason to demand `4,69,280/-.
WP(C) NO.20784 OF 2022
in the nature of 17.26 Ares of land. Ext.P15 order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer allowing to change the nature, is only in respect of 4.19 Ares. The petitioner submits that the Revenue Divisional Officer has permitted conversion only in respect of the area, where an Electric Transformer is situated. The petitioner submits that he will be satisfied for the time being, if the change in the nature is permitted only in respect of 4.19 Ares. At the same time, this Court finds that the Government of Kerala has exempted lands upto 25 Cents, from payment of fee for changing the nature of land in Revenue records, under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008.
WP(C) NO.20784 OF 2022
5
respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer shall reconsider the application submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon, within a period of two months.
The writ petition is disposed of above.
sd/-
N.NAGARESH
JUDGE
hmh
WP(C) NO.20784 OF 2022
6
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20784/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 |
A TRUE COPY OF TTHE FIELD OFCHERTHALA TO THE |
HE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BYFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN,PETITIONER. |
|---|---|---|
Exhibit P2 |
A TRUE COPY OFBY THE PETITIRESPONDENT DATED |
THE FORM NO.6 SUBMITTEDONER BEFORE THE 2ND10-01-2020 |
Exhibit P3 |
A TRUE COPY OF T46/20 DATED 1RESPONDENT TO TH |
HE COMMUNICATION S.R NO.0-01-2020 OF THE 2NDE 4TH RESPONDENT |
Exhibit P4 |
A TRUE COPY OFRESPONDENT DATED |
THE REPORT OF THE 4TH29-01-2020 |
Exhibit P5 |
A TRUE COPY OPREPARED BY THE |
F THE LOCATION SKETCH4TH RESPONDENT |
Exhibit P6 |
A TRUE COPY OFRESPONDENT DATED |
THE MAHAZAR OF THE 4TH17-01-2020 |
Exhibit P7 |
A TRUE COPY OFOFFICER, KRISHI2ND RESPONDENT |
THE REPORT OF THE KRISHIBHAVAN, CHERTHALA TO THE |
Exhibit P8 |
A TRUE COPY OF1130/2020 DATEDRESPONDENT |
THE COMMUNICATION NO. J-10-03-2020 OF THE 2ND |
Exhibit P9 |
A TRUE COPY OFDATED 27-05-2020 |
THE REPORT NO. 27/2020OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT |
Exhibit P10 |
A TRUE COPY OF TBY THE 4TH RESPO |
HE GROUP SKETCH PREPAREDNDENT DATED 29-09-2021 |
Exhibit P11 |
A TRUE COPY OFPREPARED BY THE09-2021 |
THE GROUP SKETCH TABLE4TH RESPONDENT DATED 29- |
Exhibit P12 |
A TRUE COPYPROPERTY DATED 2 |
OF THE SKETCH OF THE9-01-2020 |
Exhibit P13 |
A TRUE COPY OF3112/2020 DATEDRESPONDENT |
THE COMMUNICATION NO. J-03-08-2020 OF THE 2ND |
Exhibit P14 |
A TRUE COPY OF2020 OF THE 4TH |
THE REPORT DATED 29-12-RESPONDENT |
Exhibit P15 |
A TRUE COPY1130/2021 DATED |
OF THE ORDER NO. J2-06-11-2021 OF THE 2ND |
WP(C) NO.20784 OF 2022
7
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P16A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER, G.O [RT]
NO.1166/2021/REVDATED25-02-2021,
ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA
Exhibit P17A TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.
REV.P1/117/2021-REV DATED 23-07-2021
ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the demand for fee of `4,69,280/- for land conversion was prima facie unsustainable given the exemption for land less than 25 Cents.
Whether the Revenue Divisional Officer's order allowing change in nature of land to only 4.19 Acres requires reconsideration.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Baby M.K and others v. District Collector, Ernakulam and othersReferred¶4
Baby M.K and others v. District Collector, Ernakulam and others [2021 (6) KHC 318 (DB)]
B. Vinodkumar
District Collector, Alappuzha
Revenue Divisional Officer, Alappuzha
Tahasildhar, Cherthala
Village Officer, Cherthala South
N. Nagares
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court