Allowed

K Shaji v. Revenue Divisional Officer

Kerala HC9 Aug 2023WP(C)/14010/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the Revenue Divisional Officer to consider and pass orders on petitions filed under Rule 12(1) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008, concerning changes in land nature, within three months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to 1st respondent to consider Form-6 and Form-7 applications and pass orders within three months if documents and fees are submitted.

K Shaji Vs Revenue Divisional Officer — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 18TH SRAVANA, 1945

¶5

WP(C) NO. 14010 OF 2023

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

K SHAJI AGED 64 YEARS H/O LATE E V MAHESWAI, PRANAVAM, KOMALAPURAM VILLAGE , ALAPPUZHA-688006

¶8

BY ADV K.C.SUDHEER

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER RDO OFFICE, OPPOSITE DISTRICT COURT, THATTHAMPALLY .P.O , ALAPPUZHA-688001

¶11

2 NORTH ARYADU PANCHAYATH AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, AGRICULTURAL OFFICE , NORTH ARYADU P O, KOMALAPURAM, ALAPPUZHA-688006., PIN - 688006

¶12

3 KOMALAPURAM VILLAGE OFFICER,VILLAGE OFFICE , KOMALAPURAM, NORTH ARYADU P O, ALAPPUZHA-688006.

¶13

SMT. K M RESHMI, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 09.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C) No.14010 of 2023

¶16

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

Dated this the 9^th day of August, 2023

¶19

The petitioner is the husband of late E.V. Maheswari. The petitioner is one of the legal heir and co-owner of the property of late Maheswari. The late Maheswari is owner of 55.65 Ares of property in Block No.3 of Komalapuram Village of Ambalapuzha Taluk in Alappuzha District. The petitioner has filed the writ petition seeking to direct the 1^st respondentRevenue Divisional Officer to consider Exts.P2 and P3 Form6 and 7 applications and to pass orders thereon, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶20

The petitioner states that his wife late Maheswari is owner in possession of 19.85 Ares of land comprised in Survey No.80/7 and 35.80 Ares of land in Survey Nos.80/2 and 80/6 of Block No.3 of Komalapuram Village of Ambalapuzha Taluk in Alappuzha District. The land is garden

¶21

¶22

WP(C) No.14010 of 2023

¶23

land. It is not cultivated with paddy. It is not fit for paddy cultivation either. However, the land is described as ‘Nilam’ in Revenue records.

¶24

The petitioner wants to use the land for other purposes. Hence, the petitioner filed Exts.P2 and P3 applications in Form-6 and Form-7 in the name of late E.V. Maheswari before the Revenue Divisional Officer, invoking the provisions of Rule 12(1) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008. The applications were filed on 06.02.2023. The applications have not been considered so far. Unless the applications are considered expeditiously, the petitioner will be put to untold hardship and loss, contends the petitioner.

¶25

The Government Pleader representing the respondents 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

¶26

¶27

WP(C) No.14010 of 2023

¶28

statutory remedy under the provisions of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008, the applications submitted by the petitioner 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.

¶29

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

¶30

learned Government Pleader representing the respondents.

¶31

The property of late E.V. Maheswari is said to be dry land, but it has been described as ‘Nilam’ in Revenue records. Rule 12(1) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008 provides for making applications for changing the nature of land in Revenue records. The petitioner has invoked the provisions of Rule 12(1) of the Rules, 2008 by filing applications in Form-6 and Form-7. It being statutory applications, the Competent Authority is bound to consider the applications and pass orders thereon within a reasonable time.

¶32

¶33

WP(C) No.14010 of 2023

¶34

The writ petition is therefore disposed of with a direction

¶35

to the 1^st respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer to consider and pass orders on Exts.P2 and P3 Form-6 and Form-7 applications, if the same are received supported by all requisite documents and paying prescribed fee, if any, and to pass orders thereon in accordance with law, within a period of

three months.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH

JUDGE

spk

WP(C) No.14010 of 2023

¶42

¶43

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14010/2023

¶44

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶45

Exhibit-P1

¶46

Exhibit-P2

¶47

THE TRUE COPY OF THE LEGAL HEIR SHIP
CERTIFICATE ISSUED FROM THE TALUK
OFFICE AMBALAPPUZHA DATED 24/1/2023

¶48

THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION IN
FORM NO 6 ,RULE 12(1) OF THE KERALA
PADDY AND WET LAND PROTECTION RULES-
2008 FILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
ON 6/02/2023 FOR NECESSARY CHANGES IN
THE TENURE/NATURE OF THE PROPERTY IN
REVENUE RECORDS

¶49

Exhibit-P3THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION IN
FORM NO 7 ,RULE 12(1) OF THE KERALA
PADDY AND WET LAND PROTECTION RULES-
2008 FILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
ON 6/02/2023 FOR NECESSARY CHANGES IN
THE TENURE/NATURE OF THE PROPERTY IN
REVENUE RECORDS

¶50

Exhibit-P4

¶51

THE TRUE COPY OF THE REMINDER IN THE
NAME OF MAHESWARI ON 15/3/2023 TO THE
1ST RESPONDENT FOR GETTING AN ORDER
WITH RESPECT TO THE APPLICATION FILED
BY THE PETITIONER IN FORM NO 6 AND 7,
RULE 12(1) OF THE KERALA PADDY AND WET
LAND PROTECTION RULES-2008 IN A TIME
FRAME MANNER

K Shaji v. Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K Shaji 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

Rasiya Vs Ani P N (Corrected)*

Jessy Vs Revenue Divisional Officer (Rdo)

Usha Vijayan Vs the Kerala State Election Commission

Promod Mohandas Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirur

Rekha Mohandas Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirur

Abdul Sakeer Vs the Venkitangu Grama Panchayat