Disposed

Abdul Azeez v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Kerala HC3 Aug 2023WP(C)/15264/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, owner of land recorded as paddy land but actually dry, filed an application to change land classification under Rule 12(1) of Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008. High Court directed the Revenue Divisional Officer to consider the application and pass orders within three months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 1st respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer to consider Form-7 application and pass orders within three months.

Abdul Azeez Vs the 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

THURSDAY, THE 3^RD DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 12TH SRAVANA, 1945

¶5

WP(C) NO. 15264 OF 2023

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

ABDUL AZEEZ

¶8

AGED 57 YEARS, S/O MUHAMMED, MAROTTIKKAL HOUSE, ALUVA EAST VILLAGE, EDATHALA P.O, ALUVA TALUK, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 683561.

¶9

BY ADVS. K.R.PRATHISH P.K.SREEVALSAKRISHNAN

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, MUVATTUPUZHA ERNAKULAM – 686673.

¶12

2 THE TAHASILDAR (LR) KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, PERUMBAVOOR ERNAKULAM, PIN – 683542.

¶13

3 VILLAGE OFFICER ARAKKAPADY VILLAGE OFFICE, ARAKKAPADY VENGOLA P.O, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 683554.

¶14

BY ADV.RESHMI. K. M, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

W.P.(C) No.15264 of 2023

¶17

¶18

J U D G M E N T

¶19

Dated this the 3^rd day of August, 2023

¶20

The petitioner, who is owner of 30.93 Ares of property in Arakkappady Village of Kunnathunadu Taluk in Ernakulam District, has filed the writ petition seeking to direct the 1^st respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer to consider Ext.P3 application and to pass orders thereon, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶21

The petitioner states that he is owner in possession of 30.93 Ares of land comprised in Re-Survey Nos.239/1 and 239/2-2 of Arakkappady Village of Kunnathunadu Taluk in Ernakulam District. The land is garden land. It is not cultivated with paddy. It is not fit for paddy cultivation either. However, the land is described as paddy land in Revenue records.

¶22

The petitioner wants to use the land for other purposes. Hence, the petitioner filed Ext.P3 application in Form-7 before the

¶23

Revenue Divisional Officer, invoking the provisions of Rule 12(1)

¶24

W.P.(C) No.15264 of 2023

¶25

¶26

of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008. The application was filed on 17.03.2023. The application has not been considered so far. Unless the application is considered expeditiously, the petitioner will be put to untold hardship and loss, contends the petitioner.

¶27

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 Rules, 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.

¶28

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

¶29

learned Government Pleader representing the respondents.

¶30

W.P.(C) No.15264 of 2023

¶31

¶32

The property of the petitioner is said to be a dry land, but it has been described as paddy land 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 application in Form-7. It being a statutory application, the Competent Authority is bound to consider the application and pass orders thereon within a reasonable time.

¶33

The writ petition is therefore disposed of with a direction to the 1^st respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 Form-7 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

ams

W.P.(C) No.15264 of 2023

¶39

¶40

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15264/2023

¶41

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶42

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 08.04.2022 FOR THE YEAR 2022-2023 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 15.09.2022 IN W.P (C) NO. 29239 OF 2022 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 7 APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RDO DATED 17.03.2023

Abdul Azeez v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Azeez v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

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

Shyju Mathew, Vs the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions

Sumathy Amma Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

Thomas Cheriyan Education Trust Vs Vallachira Grama Panchayath

Denny K G Vs State of Kerala

Asok Kumar Sreedharan Vs Union of India

Muhammed @ Bapputty Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer/Sub Collector