Biju Mathew Vs State of Kerala

¶1

2025:KER:23304

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ

¶5

WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1946

¶6

WP(C) NO. 11372 OF 2016

¶7

PETITIONERS:

¶8

1 BIJU MATHEW S/O.MATHEW, AGED 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT PARAMBUKAL HOUSE, ANAKKARA KARA, 8TH MILE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶9

2 JOY THOMAS

¶10

S/O.THOMAS, AGED 56 YEARS, WANDANATH HOUSE,
ANAKKARA P.O., 8TH MILE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK,
IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶11

3 SUNIL KUMAR

¶12

S/O.DAMODARAN, AGED 41 YEARS, PATHALIL HOUSE,
ANNAKKARA KARA P.O., 8TH MILE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK,
IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶13

4P.K.DAMODARAN
S/O.KOCHUKUNJU, AGED 68 YEARS, PATHALIL HOUSE,
ANNAKKARA KARA P.O., 8TH MILE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK,
IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶14

BY ADV SRI.A.C.DEVASIA

¶15

RESPONDENTS:

¶16

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶17

2 DISTRICT COLLECTOR KUYILUMALA, PAINAVU, IDUKKI - 685 001.

¶18

3 SUPERINTENDENT OF SURVEY DISTRICT SURVEY OFFICE, COLLECTORATE, KUYILUMALA, IDUKKI - 685 001.

¶19

¶20

2025:KER:23304

¶21

WP(C) NO. 11372 OF 2016

¶22

4 DIRECTOR OF DISTRICT RE-SURVEY DISTRICT OFFICE, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 506.

¶23

5 ADDITIONAL THAHSILDAR TALUK OFFICE, UDUMBANCHOLA, NEDUMKANDAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 508.

¶24

6 VILLAGE OFFICER ANAKKARA VILLAGE, ANAKKARA, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685 512.

¶25

7 LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE UNDER KERALA CONSERVATION OF PADDY LAND AND WET LAND ACT, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN, PRESIDENT, CHAKKUPALLOM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, CHAKUPALLOM GRAMA PANCHAYATH OFFICE CHAKKUPALLOM, ANAKKARA, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN-685512.

¶26

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 19.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

¶27

¶28

2025:KER:23304

¶29

WP(C) NO. 11372 OF 2016

¶30

P.M. MANOJ, J

¶31

W.P.(C) No.11372 of 2016 -------------------------------------------------Dated this the 19^th day of March, 2025

¶32

JUDGMENT

¶33

The writ petition is preferred being aggrieved by Ext.P7 and P8 whereby correction has been effected in Thandaper with respect to the nature of land owned and occupied by the petitioners from dry land to paddy land.

¶34

1^st and 2^nd petitioners are joint owners and in possession of an extent of 20 Ares 23 Sq.Meter of land in old Survey No.63/2 and in Re Survey No.426/2 in block No.73 of Anakkara village, which was obtained as per Ext.P1 sale deed. Similarly, the 3^rd petitioner is the owner of 8 Ares 9 Sq.Meter of land in old Survey No.63/1 and in Re Survey No.426/4 of Anakkara village, obtained as per Ext.P2 sale deed. The 4^th petitioner is the owner of 80 Ares 94 Sq.Meter of land in old survey No.63/1 and 286/1 and in Re Survey No.426/8 of Anakkara village. Certain corrections have been carried out by the 5^th respondent in the light of Ext.P7 report and Ext.P8 plan. However, such corrections are against the existing nature of the property as per BTR. According to the petitioners, they have been enjoying the property as dry

¶35

¶36

2025:KER:23304

¶37

WP(C) NO. 11372 OF 2016

¶38

land and also paying tax for the property in accordance with the rate of dry land. It is evident from Ext.P10 wherein the properties in Re Survey No.426/2, 426/4 and 426/8 are recorded as Purayidom.

¶39

During the pendency of this writ petition, this Court by order dated 26.07.2017, directed the additional 7^th respondent to obtain a report from the KSREC with respect to the nature of land and also on obtaining such report, the Agricultural Officer was directed to submit a report before this Court. Accordingly, the Agricultural Officer submitted the report dated 19.03.2018, which is handed over to this Court by hand (today). Going by the said report, it appears that the Agricultural Officer reported that the Survey No.426/2 appears to be a dry land with several trees of approximately ten to fifteen years of age and Survey No.426/4 appears to be a dry land with mixed vegetation and there is an old house of approximately twenty four years having building No.450, ward No.V of Chakkupallam Grama Panchayath and 426/8 appears to be a dry land with mixed vegetation. Even in that property there is a house having building No.449, ward No.V of Chakkupallam Grama Panchayath.

¶40

Such report is preferred on the basis of the minutes of the LLMC after physical inspection of the property on

¶41

¶42

2025:KER:23304

¶43

WP(C) NO. 11372 OF 2016

¶44

02.02.2018 whereby the LLMC, on physical inspection and from the entries of the records, images and report given by the KSREC, came to the conclusion that the properties in Survey No.426/2, 426/4 and 426/8 are garden lands prior to the enactment of Kerala Conservation of Paddy and Wetland Act, 2008 (for short the ‘Act’).

¶45

Going by the said report, though it is not produced as directed by this Court on 26.07.2017, but from the report it is clear that the properties coming under Survey Nos.426/2, 426/4 and 426/8 were garden land prior to the commencement of the Act.

¶46

In response to the contentions raised by the petitioners, the learned Government Pleader submitted that as per the title deeds and the prior deeds, the description of the property is paddy land. The correction in BTR is done as per the application provided by the erstwhile owners of the properties. As evident from Ext.P7 report the nature of land is not dry land as contended by the petitioners. In the light of Ext.P7, the entries in BTR are also corrected as evident from Ext.P10. Therefore, the prayer sought in the writ petition cannot be granted.

¶47

I have heard Sri.A.C.Devasia, the learned counsel

¶48

for the petitioners and Sri.Binoy Davis, the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.

¶49

¶50

2025:KER:23304

¶51

WP(C) NO. 11372 OF 2016

¶52

Going by the contentions, it appears that the petitioners are the owners and in possession of the property in question. As per the title deeds, the properties are described as paddy land as well as dry land. However, the report made available as per the direction of this Court on 26.07.2017, by the Agricultural Officer, reveals that the properties under Survey No.426/2, 426/4 and 426/8 are dry lands. The KSREC report obtained also shows that the nature of the properties under the Survey Nos.426/2, 426/4 and 426/8 were observed as paddy lands in the toposheet of 1967. However, in the data sheets of 2007, the plots are observed under agricultural land use and this trend is continuing in the subsequent years. In the light of the said report, the LLMC met on 02.02.2018 and conducted a site visit and observed that the respective properties were in the nature of dry land and in Survey Nos.426/4 and 426/8, there are buildings which are numbered by the Chakkupallam Grama Panchayath.

¶53

Under such circumstances, the entries corrected in Ext.P10 BTR needs a reconsideration. For that purpose, the petitioners shall approach the authorized officer under Section 27 A of the Act by preferring appropriate application. On receipt of such an application, the authorised officer shall consider the same in the light of report dated 22.01.2018 from the Kerala State Remote

¶54

¶55

2025:KER:23304

¶56

WP(C) NO. 11372 OF 2016

¶57

Sensing and Environment Centre, as per report No.A/172/2015 KSREC, and the report prepared by the Agricultural Officer for submission before this Court, in accordance with the directions issued in this writ petition by order dated 26.07.2017, which is made available on the date of this hearing. The authorised officer shall pass appropriate orders on such an application, to be preferred by the petitioners within a period of three months from the date of receipt of such application after obtaining necessary report from the Village Officer. However, it is made clear that while considering such application, the authorised officer shall rely on the report obtained by the Agricultural Officer from the KSREC, as well as the report prepared by the Agricultural Officer in compliance with the direction dated 26.07.2017, and can pass appropriate orders.

¶58

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of.

P.M.MANOJ JUDGE

STB

WP(C) NO. 11372 OF 2016

¶63

2025:KER:23304

¶64

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11372/2016

¶65

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶66

`EXT.P1:`	`TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.3240/2006` `DATED 31.10.2006.`
`EXT.P2:`	`TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.252/2 DATED` `22-1-2007.`
`EXT.P3:`	`TRUE COPY OF SALE DEED NO.566/93 DATED` `12-3-93.`
`EXT.P4;`	`TRUE COPY OF RESURVEY PLAN IN FIELD` `NO.426 IN BLOCK NO.73 DATED 27.3.78.`
`EXT.P5:`	`TRUE COPY OF BTR REGISTER UNDER FORM F` `KEPT IN THE ANAKKARA VILLAGE OFFICE DATED` `5.10.2011.`
`EXT.P6:`	`THE PRESENT POSITION SHOWING PHOTOGRAPHS` `OF THE EXHIBIT P1 TO P3.`
`EXT.P7:`	`TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE` `ADDITIONAL THAHSILDAR, UDUMBANCHOLA DATED` `15.2.2013.`
`EXT.P8:`	`TRUE COPY OF THE FORGED SURVEY PLAN DATED` `6.11.2012.`
`EXT.P9:`	`TRUE COPY OF THE SURVEY PLAN PREPARED BY` `THE TALUK SURVEYOR V.R.MANOJ ON THE BASIS` `OF EXHIBIT P4 RESURVEY PLAN DATED` `6.11.2012.`
`EXT.P10:`	`TRUE COPY OF THE PRESENT BTR DTED` `17.1.2013.`
`EXT.P11:`	`TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED` `17.12.2015 FILED BY THE PETITIONER.`

Biju Mathew v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Biju Mathew v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajitha Haridasan Vs State of Kerala

Dr.Smitha M., Vs State of Kerala

Dr.Shiny Mathew Vs State of Kerala

Radha Viswanathan Vs State of Kerala

M/S. Chakola Homes Pvt. Ltd, Vs the Secretary, Corporation of Cochin

Rama U Vs State of Kerala