Disposed

Arafath Vattaparambath v. the Local Level Monitoring Committee

Kerala HC7 Jun 2024WP(C)/8972/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge disposed of a writ petition challenging decisions regarding land data bank entries. The court cited the Conservation of Paddy Land Act and closed the petition without prejudice to the petitioner's liberty to pursue statutory remedies.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is closed without prejudice to the liberty of the petitioner to move an application under Form 5.

Arafath Vattaparambath Vs the Local Level Monitoring Committee — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S.

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 17TH JYAISHTA, 1946

¶5

WP(C) NO. 8972 OF 2018

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

ARAFATH VATTAPARAMBATH

¶8

AGED 45 YEARS
S/O. HASSAN, VATTAPARAMBATH HOUSE, VALAMBUR,
PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-679325.

¶9

BY ADVS.
SRI.K.M.FIROZ
SRI.E.C.AHAMED FAZIL
SRI.P.C.MUHAMMED NOUSHIQ
SMT.M.SHAJNA
SMT.UMMUL FIDA

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE
ANGADIPPURAM, (VALAMBUR VILLAGE),
REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER AND AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
OFFICE OF AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
VALAMBUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679325.

¶12

2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR MALAPPURAM, CIVIL STATION, MALAPPURAM-676505.

¶13

3THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-679101.

¶14

4AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
OFFICE OF AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, VALAMBUR,
PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679325.

¶15

5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER VALAMBOOR, VILLAGE OFFICE, VALAMBUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679325.

¶16

6 THE TAHSILDAR PERINTHALMANNA, MINI CIVIL STATION, PERINTHALMANNA-679322.

¶17

WP(C) NO. 8972 OF 2018 -2-

¶18

7 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER MINI CIVIL STATION, PERINTHALMANNA-679322.

¶19

8 THE SUB REGISTRAR PERINTHALMANNA, SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE, PATTAMBI ROAD, PERINTHALMANNA-679322.

¶20

BY ADV:

¶21

SMT. PREETHA. K. K, Sr. G. P.

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 07.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

WP(C) NO. 8972 OF 2018 -3-

¶24

JUDGMENT

¶25

The reliefs sought for in the writ petition are as follows:

¶26

“i) To call for the records leading to Exhibits P1 to P3 and direct the first respondent Local Level Monitoring Committee to dispose of Exhibit P1 application as expeditiously as possible by issuing a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ direction or order.

¶27

ii) To direct the 2^nd respondent to keep in abeyance the further proceedings as per Exhibit P2 order pending disposal of Exhibit P1 application by issuing a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ direction or order.

¶28

iii) To direct the third respondent to keep in abeyance the passing of orders in Exhibit P3 revision petition pending disposal of Exhibit P1 application by issuing a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ direction or order.

¶29

iv) to grant such other reliefs in favour of the Petitioner as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper on the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶30

WP(C) NO. 8972 OF 2018 -4-

¶31

Admittedly, the petitioner’s land is included in the Data Bank. However, the petitioner submits that as against the order passed by the District Collector to restore the nature of the land under Ext.P2 order has

¶32

been challenged before the Secretary to Government, Department of Revenue, Government of Kerala by filing Ext.P3 Revision Petition. The petitioner submits that the revision is yet to be taken up for consideration and consequential order has not been passed.

¶33

The learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that the property of the petitioner is already included in the Data Bank. If that be so, the District Collector cannot be found fault with issuing Ext.P2 direction and therefore any direction from this Court to the Government to consider Ext.P3 Revision Petition becomes fait accompli.

¶34

On the other hand, Sri.K.M.Firoz, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that under proviso to sub-clause (4) of Section 5 of the Kerala

¶35

WP(C) NO. 8972 OF 2018 -5-

¶36

Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act enables him to move an application before the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) for correction of entry in the Data Bank.

¶37

Therefore, I deem it appropriate to close this writ petition without prejudice to the liberty of the petitioner to move an application under Form 5.

¶38

Sd/-

¶39

EASWARAN S.
 JUDGE

¶40

¶41

WP(C) NO. 8972 OF 2018 -6-

¶42

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8972/2018

¶43

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶44

EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED
18.02.2018 PREFERRED BY PETITIONER
BEFORE FIRST RESPONDENT, LOCAL LEVEL
MONITORING COMMITTEE.
EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF ORDER AS PER FILE NO.
DCMPM/827/2018-B2 DATED 01.02.2018
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT, DISTRICT
COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM.
EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF REVISION PETITION DATED
18.02.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF
REVENUE, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THE
THIRD RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 28 OF
THE KERALA CONSERVATION OF PADDY LAND
AND WET LAND ACT.

Arafath Vattaparambath v. the Local Level Monitoring Committee

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arafath Vattaparambath v. the Local Level Monitoring Committee

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

Rajana v.T., Vs State of Kerala

Mr. Surendran Nair.P.v Vs the Assistant General Manager Syndicate Bank Amended as Canara Bank

Rajan. G. Pinayuvila Vs the Deputy Accountant General (a&Rs)

M.I.Mathew @ Mathu Vs Geologist

A.K.Ashraf Vs the State of Kerala

V.S.Sobha Vs State of Kerala