Writ petition challenging Form 6 orders and building permit for paddy land conversion. Court held orders could not be set aside without considering appeal provisions, remanded to District Collector to decide after appeal.
Order to District Collector to consider appeal within three weeks and decide within three months; status quo maintained.
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 MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JULY 2023 / 19TH ASHADHA, 1945 WP(C) NO.2024 OF 2023
PETITIONER :-
MAKKAR VM, CHERUPURAM VATTEKKATT HOUSE, ASHAMANOOR, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 683 549.
BY ADVS. P.THOMAS GEEVERGHESE TONY THOMAS (INCHIPARAMBIL) E.S.FIROS AMRUTHA K.P. SRADHA MOHAN
RESPONDENTS :-
WP(C) NO.2024 OF 2023
-: 2 :-
BY ADVS. K.S.ARUN KUMAR M.SASINDRAN SIDHARTH P. SASI(K/762/2022) SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN, SR.GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO.2024 OF 2023
-: 3 :-
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 10th day of July, 2023
This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs :-
Government Pleader, the learned counsel appearing for the 7th respondent and the learned counsel appearing for respondents 8 and 9.
that the petitioner is the owner in possession of 7.65 Ares of agricultural land in Re-survey No.113/18 of Block No.15 of
WP(C) NO.2024 OF 2023
-: 4 :-
Asamanoor Village in Kunnathunadu Taluk. It is submitted that the 8th respondent had purchased 38.60 Ares of paddy land by Ext.P1 sale deed dated 29.9.2018. By Ext.P2 settlement deed, 19 Ares of the said property was settled in favour of his wife, who is the 9th respondent herein. It is submitted that thereafter, two Form 6 applications were filed as evidenced by Exts.P3 and P3(a) and Exts.P6 and P6(a) orders under Section 27A of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 (for short, ‘the 2008 Act’) was obtained without disclosing that the properties were part of a contiguous plot having an extent of 38.60 Ares in area. Thereafter, 8th and 9th respondents together submitted an application for a building permit for constructing an auditorium and Ext.P7 building permit has been granted.
WP(C) NO.2024 OF 2023
-: 5 :-
Ext.P7 building permit granted by the Grama Panchayat without taking note of the separate orders obtained by respondents 8 and 9 are all vitiated and are liable to be set aside.
WP(C) NO.2024 OF 2023
-: 6 :-
P3(a) applications have been filed for obtaining permission under Section 27A of the 2008 Act. Going by the provisions of Section 27A, the question with regard to permission for conversion of the property is to be decided on the basis of applications filed under Form 6 or Form 7 as the case may be. In case the extent of the property is more than 20.23 Ares, then an application has to be preferred in Form 7 along with all supporting documents and 10% of the area has to be earmarked for water conservancy measures even if the application is allowed. The relevant date for considering the extent of the property is 30.12.2017, the date on which Section 27A was brought into effect by amendment in the 2008 Act. If that be so, in case the facts pleaded by the petitioner are correct, then the purchase of the property by Ext.P1 sale deed dated 29.9.2018 and the settlement of a part of the property by Ext.P2 settlement deed dated 31.10.2019 on the 9th respondent will not make any difference to the situation and a Form 7 application would have to be filed with all its conditions.
In the above view of the matter, I am of the opinion that the contention raised by the petitioner with regard to the date of purchase of the property by the petitioner and the date of Ext.P2 settlement deed in favour of the 9th respondent requires a consideration before anything further can be done in the matter.
WP(C) NO.2024 OF 2023
-: 7 :-
There will, accordingly, be a direction that in case the petitioner submits an appeal from Exts.P6 and P6(a) orders before the District Collector within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, the appeal shall be taken up and considered taking note of Exts.P1 and P2 as well. The contesting respondents as well as the Panchayat shall also be put on notice and the matter shall be considered in accordance with law, after considering their contentions as well. Appropriate orders shall be passed within a period of three months thereafter, taking specific note of the provisions of Section 27A of the 2008 Act and the requirements for making applications under Form 6 and Form 7 respectively. To enable the District Collector to take an appropriate decision in accordance with law, the petitioner shall produce a copy of this writ petition complete in all respects before the District Collector. Till orders are passed as directed above, status quo as on today with respect to the properties shall be maintained.
Sd/ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE
Jvt/11.7.2023
WP(C) NO.2024 OF 2023
-: 8 :-
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2024/2023
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
| Exhibit.P1 | THE TRUE COPY OF THE SAID SALE DEED DATED 29/9/2018 |
|---|---|
| Exhibit.P2 | THE TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED DATED.31.10.2019 |
| Exhibit.P3 | THE TRUE COPY OF FORM 6 APPLICATION FILED BY THE 8TH RESPONDENT DATED. 4.6.2020 |
| Exhibit.P3[a] | TRUE COPY OF FORM 6 APPLICATION FILED BY THE 9TH RESPONDENT DATED.4.6.2020 |
| Exhibit.P4 | ORIGINAL PHOTOGRAPHS OF 8TH & 9TH RESPONDENT PROPERTY |
| Exhibit.P5 | TRUE COPY REPORT OF THE VILLAGE OFFICER ASAMANNOR DATED.5.6.2020 |
| Exhibit.P5[a] | TRUE COPY OF REPORT SUBMITTED BY VILLAGE OFFICER ASAMANNOOR. DATED NIL |
| Exhibit.P6 | THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 3/8/2020PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT |
| Exhibit.P6[a] | THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 3/8/2020PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT |
| Exhibit.P7 | TRUE COPY OF BUILDING PERMIT DATED 26.9.2022 ISSUED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner can approach the high court directly or must first file a statutory appeal against the conversion orders.
Whether the conversion applications and building permit are valid given the contiguous nature of the land and Section 27A requirements.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
MAKKAR VM
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER MUVATTUPUZHA
VILLAGE OFFICER ASHAMANOOR
AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
DISTRICT COLLECTOR
TAHASILDAR KUNNATHUNADU TALUK
ANU SIVARAMAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
