W.A. 2754/2009 arises out of the judgment in W.P.(C) 23071/2009. The appellant, who was the petitioner, applied for permission to convert a piece of wet land under the provisions of the Kerala Land Utilization Order, 1967. The application was made in 2007, Reminders were also sent subsequently and the matter was pending consideration when a new enactment namely, Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land Wet Land Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) was passed and came into fore, with effect from 12.8.2008. Subsequently, the application submitted by the appellant was rejected holding that since the Act has already come into fore, he has to seek permission under the said Act. Challenging the said order, the Writ Petition was filed. Learned Single Judge, after referring to the relevant provisions contained in the Conservation Act more particularly S.3(1) of the said Act, which prohibits conversion or reclamation of the paddy land except in accordance with the provisions of that Act, on and from the date of commencement of that Act, held that no order could be passed in an application made under the Kerala Land Utilization Act on and after coming into force of the Act and dismissed the Writ Petition. Impugning the said judgment the Writ Appeal has been preferred.

2. W.P.(C), 13535 of 2009 and W.P.(C) 30788 of 2009 came up before us based on a reference order made by the learned Single Judge. When W.P.(C) 30788 of 2009 came up for consideration, the learned Judge thought that in view of the decision of this Court in Jayakrishnan v. District Collector (2009 (1) KLT 123), Shahanaz Shukkor v. Chelannur Grama Panchayat (2009 (3) KLT 899) and Hajee Abubacker v. Revenue Divisional Officer, Palakkad (2009 (4) KLT 49) there is some conflict between the above decisions on the issue as to whether after the commencement of the Kerala Conservation 0f Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008 an application filed by the petitioner under the Kerala Land Utilization Order 1967 for permission to put the land described in the title deed as ‘Nilam’ to use for constructing a residential building is maintainable. W.P.(C) 13535/2009 which came up for consideration subsequently was also referred to the Division Bench in view of the earlier reference made as above.

3. We will refer to the detailed facts in each of these cases at appropriate place after answering the legal issue with reference to the scope and application of the provisions in the Land Utilization Order, after the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008 came into force.

4. The Kerala Land Utilization Order, 1967 was issued by the Government of Kerala, in exercise of the powers conferred under sub-s. (1) and clause (b) of sub-s. (2) of S.3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (Central Act 10 of 1955), read with the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Food and Agriculture No. S.R.O. 3950 dated 9th December, 1957 and with the prior approval of the Central Government. The term “Food Crops” defined under C1.2(b) is as follows:

5. Clause 6 of the L.U.O. 1967 which is relevant for our purpose is extracted hereunder:

6. Land cultivated with any food crop not to be cultivated with any other food crop:-

“Food crops” includes paddy, fish, sugarcane, vegetables, tapioca, yam, tea, coffee, cardamom, pepper, groundnut, cocoa and banana plantain.”

(1) No holder of any land, which has been under cultivation with any food crop for a continuous period of three years immediately before the commencement of this Order, shall convert or attempt to convert to utilize or attempt to utilize such laid for the cultivation of any other food crop or for any other purpose except under and in accordance with the terms of a written permissions given by the Collector.

(Explanation:-For the purpose of this sub-clause and sub-clause (2), removal of tree-growth, whether partial or total, on any land cultivated with cardamom shall be deemed to be an attempt to convert or utiliz