Allowed

Oruma People’S Health Academy Trust Vengad, v. District Collector

Kerala HC26 Mar 2024WP(C)/9050/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A charitable trust challenged rejection of its application to construct a pond inside a paddy field. The court quashed the rejecting orders, holding that per precedent the purpose must be an allied activity of paddy cultivation, and directed reconsideration after hearing.

What did the court decide?

Exts.P6 and P8 quashed; second respondent directed to reconsider the application after hearing affected parties within two months.

Oruma People’S Health Academy Trust Vengad, Vs District… — Landlord and Tenant | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 6TH CHAITHRA, 1946

¶5

WP(C) NO. 9050 OF 2023

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

ORUMA PEOPLE'S HEALTH ACADEMY TRUST VENGAD,
AGED 58 YEARS

¶8

VENGAD P.O., MALLAPURAM DISTRICT, KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN MAJEED PARAPPALLATH,
S/O.KAMMALI, PARAPPALLATH HOUSE, VENGAD P.O.,
KARUPARAMBA, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 679338
BY ADV BIJU ABRAHAM

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 DISTRICT COLLECTOR,

¶11

COLLECTORATE, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676505

¶12

2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPURAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 679322

¶13

3 THE MOORKKANAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH, VENGAD P.O., MALAPPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN - 679338

¶14

4 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN, MOORKANAD, VENGAD P.O.,, PIN - 679322

¶15

5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VILLAGE OFFICE, MOORKANAD,PIN - 679322

¶16

OTHER PRESENT:

¶17

GODREN SR GP

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

WP(C) NO. 9050 OF 2023

¶20

..2..

¶21

MOHAMMED NIAS C.P, J.

¶22

========================

¶23

W.P. (C) No. 9050 of 2023

¶24

========================

¶25

Dated this the 26^th day of March, 2024

¶26

J U D G M E N T

¶27

The petitioner challenges Exts.P6 and P8 orders by which their application for the construction of a pond inside the paddy field was rejected. The petitioner claims to be a charitable trust formed in the year 2020 for promoting agricultural operations and health developmental activities. The petitioner, to achieve their objectives had secured an extent of 1 acre 7 cents of land and decided to construct a water reservoir (pond) having 77.07 meters in length and 42.78 meters in width. The petitioner submits that the reasoning given in Exts.P6 and P8 cannot be sustained going by the judgment of this Court in Wonderla Holidays Ltd. V. Revenue Divisional Officer, Muvattupuzha

¶28

and Others (2021 (5) KHC 754) and Shaju C.J. v. State of Kerala (2022 KHC 903).

¶29

The learned Government Pleader on the other

¶30

..3..

¶31

WP(C) NO. 9050 OF 2023

¶32

hand, submitted that the judgment reported in Hema Anil v. State of Kerala (2023 (6) KHC 495) held that if the digging of a well, pond or bund is not connected in any way with the paddy cultivation and for any extrinsic purposes, the same cannot be allowed. It was held that the construction of bunds, drainage channels, ponds and canals must be an allied activity of the paddy land and not otherwise. In the instant case, therefore, the purpose for which the pond is sought to be put up has to be considered and it can be allowed only if it is an allied activity in connection with the paddy field. In such circumstances, a fresh consideration has to be made in the light of the law laid down by this Court in the aforesaid judgments.

¶33

Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in the

¶34

following manner;

¶35

Exts.P6 and P8 are quashed.

¶36

There will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to re-consider the applications submitted by the petitioner

¶37

and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other affected parties, if any, and to take an appropriate decision in accordance with law taking note of

¶38

WP(C) NO. 9050 OF 2023

¶39

..4..

¶40

the above judgments as well within a period of two months

¶41

from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶42

The writ petition is allowed as above.

¶43

Sd/-

¶44

MOHAMMED NIAS C.P

¶45

JUDGE

¶46

¶47

WP(C) NO. 9050 OF 2023

¶48

..5..

¶49

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9050/2023

¶50

PETITIONER EXHIBITS :

¶51

EXHIBIT P1A TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION OF THE
3RD RESPONDENT DATED 11-09-2020
EXHIBIT P2A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED
28-12-2020 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P3A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 4-01-2021

¶52

EXHIBIT P4A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OBTAINED BY
THE SECOND RESPONDENT FROM THE 4TH
RESPONDENT DATED 19-04-2021

¶53

EXHIBIT P5A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OBTAINED BY
THE SECOND RESPONDENT FROM THE 5TH
RESPONDENT DATED 15-04-2021
EXHIBIT P6A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE
SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 18-08-2021
EXHIBIT P7A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
1ST RESPONDENT DATED 9-10-2021

¶54

EXHIBIT P8A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.
DCMPM/10009/2021-B2 DATED 17-02-2023 OF
THE 1ST RESPONDENT

¶55

// True Copy // PA To Judge

Oruma People’S Health Academy Trust Vengad, v. District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Oruma People’S Health Academy Trust Vengad, v. District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jaco K. a Vs Kaiparambu Grama Panchayath

M/S Alliance Marine Products Vs Kerala State Pollution Control Board

Dr. Bhavyasree. P.G Vs Vellappally Natesan

E.M. Ashraf, Vs the District Collector

Dileesh Kumar, Vs Neduvathoor Grama Panchayat

Jayakumar.K, Vs State of Kerala