Disposed

Geetha Kumary, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC12 Apr 2024WP(C)/39287/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Owner of less than 25 cents challenged a notice demanding fees on her Form 6 application under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008. Following an earlier judgment, the court quashed the fee demand and directed consideration of the application without insisting on fees within four months.

What did the court decide?

Ext.P5 fee-demand notice quashed; 3rd respondent directed to decide Ext.P4 Form 6 application without insisting on fees, within four months.

Geetha Kumary, Vs State of Kerala — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 12THDAY OF APRIL 2024 / 23RD CHAITHRA, 1946

¶5

WP(C) NO. 39287 OF 2023

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

GEETHA KUMARY, AGED 51 YEARS D/O THANKKAMMA,
PALANILKUNNATHIL VEETIL, KARAKKAD P.O, MULAKKUZHA
VILLAGE, CHENGANNUR TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT., PIN -
689504
BY ADVS. AJITH MURALI SWAPNA VIJAYAN MOHANAN M.K.

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

STATE OF KERALA , REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,

¶10

1 DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANATHAPURAM., PIN - 695001 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT., PIN -

¶11

2 689645

¶12

THE REVENUE DIVISION OFFICER, REVENUE DIVISIONAL

¶13

3 OFFICE, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT., PIN - 691523 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PERINGANADU VILLAGE OFFICE,

¶14

4 PERINGANADU (PO)., PERINGANADU VILLAGE , ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT., PIN - 691551 LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTE REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER, AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHIBHAVAN,

¶15

5 ADOOR , ADOOR TALUK , PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT., PIN - 691523

¶16

SMT.SHEEBA S,GP

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
12.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

WP(C) NO.39287 of 2023

¶19

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

Dated this the 12th day of April, 2024

¶22

Petitioner is stated to be the owner in possession of 8.09 Ares (22.072 cents) of property in Re.Sy.No.9/10-2 in Block No.10 of Peringanadu Village in Adoor Taluk, Pathanamthitta District. The petitioner had submitted Ext.P4 application under Form 6 under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 concerning the said property. The 3rd respondent issued Ext.P5 notice directing the petitioner to make the payments indicated in the said communication. The petitioner challenges Ext.P5 notice on the ground that the extent of his property is less than 25 cents and therefore there cannot be any direction to make any payment.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue is covered by Ext.P6 judgment of this Court in WP(C) No.3538 of 2023 dated 30.03.2023 wherein, it was held that where the extent of land is less than 25 cents, the same has to be considered without insisting on any fee.

¶24

In view of the above, Ext.P5 is quashed. There

¶25

¶26

WP(C) NO.39287 of 2023

¶27

will be a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 application under the 2008 Act without insisting on payment of any fees as the extent of the property is less than 25 cents. Orders shall be passed within four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶28

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶29

Sd/MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

SSK/12/04

¶32

WP(C) NO.39287 of 2023

¶33

¶34

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 39287/2023

¶35

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶36

A TRUE COPY OF SETTLEMENT DEED NO.2182/2002 OF SRO
Exhibit-P1
ADOOR DATED 13.09.2002.
A TRUE COPY OF TAX RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 4TH
Exhibit-P2
RESPONDENT DATED 27.04.2022.
A TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY
Exhibit-P3
THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 6.5.2022.
Exhibit-P4A TRUE COPY OF FORM-6 APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED
23.03.2023.

¶37

A TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY
THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 6.5.2022.

¶38

A TRUE COPY OF NOTICE NO.1150/2023 DATED 04.10.2023
ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶39

Exhibit-P5

¶40

THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN W.P ©
Exhibit-P6
NO.3538/2023 AND CONNECTED CASE DATED 30.03.2023.

¶41

RESPONDENT’S EXHIBITS : NIL

¶42

//TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

Geetha Kumary, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Geetha Kumary, 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abdul Ashif Kanchirathingal, Vs the Secretary

Vende Infrastructure and Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Salih Tma, Vs State of Kerala, Represented by Secretary to Government

Sinaj Michael Vs the Committee Constituted Under Rule 58 of Chapter IX of Kerala Panchayat Building RULES,2019

Zacharias Poomkudy Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Latheef Vs Meera. K. IAS