Remanded

Mathew v. Revenue Divisional Officer

Kerala HC14 Nov 2022WP(C)/23023/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala directed the Revenue Divisional Officer to consider a Form-5 application regarding land removal from the Data Bank and a Form-6 application for changing the nature of land within specified periods.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Respondent Revenue Divisional Officer to consider Ext.P3 Form-5 application within two months and Ext.P2 Form-6 application within a further two months pending the outcome.

Mathew Vs Revenue Divisional Officer — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

MONDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 23RD KARTHIKA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 23023 OF 2022

¶5

PETITIONER

¶6

MATHEW
AGED 57 YEARS
S/O.CHACKO, AGED 57 YEARS, KAKKATHURUTHEL HOUSE, AKAMALA,
KUMARANELLUR.P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680590.
BY ADVS.

¶7

C.A.CHACKO
C.M.CHARISMA

¶8

RESPONDENT

¶9

REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
THRISSUR, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, CIVIL STATION,
AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR, PIN-680003.

¶10

SMT.VIDYA KURIAKOSE GP

¶11

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
14.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

WP(C) NO.23023 OF 2022

¶13

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

Dated this the 14^th day of November, 2022

¶16

The petitioner is owner of 8.50 Ares of land in Survey No.82/2-2 in Block No.51 of Enkakkadu Village of Thalappilly Taluk in Thrissur District, has approached this Court seeking to direct the respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer to consider and pass orders on Exts.P2 and P3 applications, within a time frame.

¶17

The petitioner states that he is owner of 8.50 Ares of land in Survey No.82/2-2 in Block No.51 of Enkakkadu Village of Thalappilly Taluk in Thrissur District. The land is a garden land. However, it has been described as ‘Nilam’ in Basic Tax Register.

¶18

The petitioner would state that the property of the petitioner is not a paddy land and is not suitable for paddy cultivation. The petitioner wants to use the land for other purposes. Hence, the petitioner filed Ext.P3 application in

¶19

WP(C) NO.23023 OF 2022

¶20

¶21

Form-5, invoking the provisions of Rule 4(d) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008 for removing the land from the Data Bank. The petitioner also submitted Ext.P2 application in Form-6 before the Revenue Divisional Officer, invoking the provisions of Rule 12(1) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008 to make necessary changes in the nature of land in Revenue records. Form 5 application was filed on 10.08.2022 and Form 6 application was filed on 01.07.2022. The applications are not disposed of so far. Unless the applications are considered expeditiously, the petitioner will be put to untold hardship and loss, contends the petitioner.

¶22

The Government Pleader representing the respondent resisted the writ petition. The Government Pleader controverted all material allegations made by the petitioner, in the writ petition. The Government Pleader, however, submitted that since the petitioner has invoked a statutory remedy under the provisions of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and

¶23

WP(C) NO.23023 OF 2022

¶24

4

¶25

Wetland Act, 2008, the applications submitted by the petitioner

¶26

can be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law, provided the applications are received, are complete in all respects and are supported by all necessary documents.

¶27

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader representing the respondent.

¶28

The petitioner is owner of 8.50 Ares of land in Survey No.82/2-2 in Block No.51 of Enkakkadu Village of Thalappilly Taluk in Thrissur District. According to the petitioner, the land is not a paddy land or wetland. In order to use the land for other purposes, the petitioner has submitted Ext.P3 application for removal of the land from the Data Bank and Ext.P2 application for change of nature of the land in Revenue records.

¶29

Exts.P3 and P2 applications are made by the petitioner invoking the provisions contained in the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 and the

¶30

WP(C) NO.23023 OF 2022

¶31

¶32

Rules made thereunder. As the petitioner has invoked statutory remedies, the competent authority, namely the respondentRevenue Divisional Officer, is bound to consider the applications within a reasonable time and take a decision thereon, in accordance with law.

¶33

In the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer to consider Ext.P3 Form-5 application and take a decision thereon, within a period of two months. Depending upon the outcome of Ext.P3 application, the respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer shall pass orders on Ext.P2 Form-6 application, within a further period of two months.

sd/-

N.NAGARESH

JUDGE

hmh

WP(C) NO.23023 OF 2022

¶39

¶40

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 23023/2022

¶41

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶42

Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGE OF DATA BANK
ISSUED BY AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHI
BHAVAN, WADAKKANCHERY.
Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 1/7/2022
SUBMITTED BEFORE RESPONDENT ALONG WITH
RECEIPT FOR REMITTING THE FEE.
Exhibit P3TRUE COPY OF FORM 5 APPLICATION DATED
10.8.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.

¶43

RESPONDENT’S EXHIBITS : NIL

Mathew v. Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mathew v. 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

Official Liquidator Vs M.Sukumaran

Industrial Development Bank of India Vs Official Liquidator

M/S.Soumya Kuries and Loans (P) Ltd. (in Liquidation) Vs Smt.Girija Nandakumar

M/S. Issac Peter & Company (P) Ltd. Vs State of Kerala

C.T.Aniyan Vs State of Kerala

Eldho.M.a. Vs State of Kerala