Disposed

Johnson Km S/O Varkey Mathai v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC7 Jul 2023WP(C)/14068/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought directives to the Revenue Divisional Officer to expedite consideration of his Form-5 application under Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land Rules, 2008, regarding land classification. Court directed competent authority to dispose within three months.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition held disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's Form-5 application and pass orders within three months from the date of receipt of the petition copy.

Johnson Km S/O Varkey Mathai Vs State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 2023 / 16TH ASHADHA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 14068 OF 2023

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

JOHNSON KM, S/O VARKEY MATHAI, AGED 70 YEARS
KADUTHAPARANBIL HOUSE, SOUTH PARAVUR P.O.,
NOW RESIDING AT 31/323A, PARADISE GARDE,
PARADISE ROAD, VYTILLA, ERNAKULAM-19,
REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER
MR.VENUGOPOALAN CK, AGED 70, S/O SREE KUMARAN,
CHAKKATHUKADU HOUSE, SOUTH PARAVUR P.O.,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN – 682307

¶7

BY ADV V.K.HEMA

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682031

¶10

2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER OFFICE OF THE RDO, FORT KOCHI, REPRESENTED BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶11

3 AMBALLUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KANJIRRAMATTOM P.O., ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682315 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

¶12

4 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, AMBALLUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER/MEMBER OF LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE, AMBALLOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682315

¶13

WP(C) No.14068 of 2023

¶14

¶15

5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, AMBALLUR VILLAGE OFFICE, ERNAKULAM/MEMBER OF LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE, AMBALLUR PANCHAYATH, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682315

¶16

GP-K. G. SAROJINI
SRI.T.K AJITHKUAR, SC

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 07.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

¶19

WP(C) No.14068 of 2023

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

Dated this the 7^th day of July, 2023

¶22

The petitioner, who is owner of 1 Hectare and 1.60 Ares of land in Block No.22 of Amballur Village of Kanayannur Taluk in Ernakulam District, has filed this writ petition seeking to direct the 2^nd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer to consider and pass orders on Ext.P7 application within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶23

The petitioner states that he is owner of 1 Hectare and 1.60 Ares of land situated in Survey No.298/8 of Block No.22 of Amballur Village, Kanayannur Taluk in Ernakulam District. The land is a garden land. It is not cultivated with paddy. It is not fit for paddy cultivation either. However, the land is included in Data Bank and is described as paddy land in Revenue records also.

¶24

The petitioner wants to use the land for other

¶25

purposes. Hence, the petitioner filed Ext.P7 application in

¶26

¶27

WP(C) No.14068 of 2023

¶28

Form-5, invoking Rule 4(4D) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008. The application was filed on 23.02.2023. The application is not disposed of so far. Unless the application is considered expeditiously, the petitioner will be put to untold hardship and loss, contends the petitioner.

¶29

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 statutory remedy under the provisions of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008, the application submitted by the petitioner can be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law, provided the application is received, is complete in all respects and is supported by all necessary documents.

¶30

¶31

WP(C) No.14068 of 2023

¶32

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

¶33

and the learned Government Pleader representing the respondents.

¶34

The petitioner is owner of 1 Hectare and 1.60 Ares of land situated in Survey No.298/8 of Block No.22 of Amballur Village, Kanayannur Taluk in Ernakulam District. The land is included in the Data Bank of paddy land and wetland prepared under Section 5(4)(i) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008. According to the petitioner, the land owned by him is neither paddy land nor wetland. The land is not suitable for paddy cultivation. The petitioner wants to use the land for other purposes and hence he has filed an application in Form-5 seeking to remove the land from Data Bank.

¶35

The Form-5 application has been filed by the petitioner invoking his statutory right under Rule 4(4D) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008.

¶36

¶37

WP(C) No.14068 of 2023

¶38

The application being a statutory application, the competent authority has a legal duty to consider the application in accordance with law, within a reasonable time.

¶39

The writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the 2^nd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer to consider Ext.P7 Form-5 application submitted by the petitioner if the same is 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.14068 of 2023

¶45

¶46

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14068/2023

¶47

`PETITIO`	`NER EXHIBITS`
`Exhibit`	`P1` `THE TRUE` `NO.1861/1`	`COPY OF` `986 DATE`	`THE SETT` `D 23-09-19`	`LEMENT DEED` `86`
`Exhibit`	`P2` `THE TRUE` `DATED 17-`	`COPY OF` `01-1987`	`THE LOAN`	`APPLICATION`
`Exhibit`	`P3` `THE TRUE` `DATED 11-`	`COPY OF` `05-1992`	`THE LOAN`	`APPLICATION`
`Exhibit`	`P4` `THE TRUE` `NO.960/20` `22-03-200`	`COPY O` `04 OF MU` `4`	`F THE RE` `LANTHURUTH`	`LEASE DEED` `Y SRO DATED`
`Exhibit`	`P5` `THE TRUE` `THE DATA`	`COPY OF` `BANK DAT`	`THE RELEVA` `ED 23-02-2`	`NT PAGES OF` `023`
`Exhibit`	`P6` `THE TRU` `DETAILS` `AMBALLUR` `SAMITHY D`	`E COPY` `OF THE` `VILLAGE` `ATED 02-`	`OF THE` `PETITIONER` `KARSHAKA` `10-2010`	`MEMBERSHIP` `ISSUED BY` `SAMRAKSHANA`
`Exhibit`	`P7` `THE TRUE` `FORM-5` `5/2023/90`	`COPY OF` `BEARING` `237 DATE`	`THE APP` `APPLICA` `D 23-02-20`	`LICATION IN` `TION` `NO.` `23`
`Exhibit`	`P8` `THE TRUE` `FILED B` `DATED 27-`	`COPY OF` `Y THE` `03-2023`	`THE COMMIS` `ADVOCATE`	`SION REPORT` `ARUNIMA.N.R`
`Exhibit`	`P9` `THE INFO` `JOHN AS` `ACT DATED`	`RMATION` `PER THE` `27-03-2`	`OBTAINED` `RIGHT TO` `023`	`BY MR.BIJU` `INFORMATION`
`Exhibit`	`P10` `THE TRUE` `EXECUTED` `02-2023`	`COPY OF` `BY THE`	`THE POWER` `PETITIONER`	`OF ATTORNEY` `DATED 28-`

Johnson Km S/O Varkey Mathai v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Johnson Km S/O Varkey Mathai 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

T.K.Sukumaran, Vs 1. Varantharapilly Grama Panchayat

Rejeena Thomas, Vs Varantharapilly Grama Panchayat

Ashwathy K. G., Vs Union of India

Rajani K.C Vs the District Geologist

Shiju Kuriakose, Vs State of Kerala

Sunil Kumar K.R Vs Nazer Km