A. Muhamed Mustaque, J.

1. These batch of writ petitions are filed seeking for a direction to consider the applications filed by the petitioners under clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order for utilising land for other purposes. The petitioners' case is that their land has been converted prior to the Act 28 of 2008 and is no longer fit for paddy cultivation. The petitioners would submit that their paddy land is not included in the draft data bank either as a paddy land or wetland and therefore, the Collector has to give permission in terms of clause 6 of KLUO to utilise the land for other purposes. KLUO is issued under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 in the wake of food scarcity to boost up production of food crops. It refers to certain food crops which includes Paddy also. The nature of the power vested with the Collector under the KLUO, is in the nature of the enabling powers to command the holders of the land to cultivate those food crops, which are referred in the KLUO. The right of land holder is therefore, fettered to the extent the enabling power that could be exercised by the Collector. Power is also given to the Collector to relax the enabling power by permitting the holder of the land to utilise the land for other purposes in terms of clause 6 of KLUO. This is essentially when it is satisfied that the land is no longer required for cultivation of food crops which were under cultivation.

2. When the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008 was enacted in the year 2008, all the matters relating to the Paddy land have to be considered and treated in terms of the provisions of the Act 28 of 2008 (see judgement of the Division Bench of this Court in Praveen v. Land Revenue Commissioner, 2010 (2) KLT 617). However, in respect of other food crops, which are not covered by the Act 28 of 2008, if it is otherwise covered under KLUO, the KLUO should be followed for the purposes of utilising the land.

3. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Revenue Divisional Officer v. Jalaja Dileep, 2015 (1) KLT 984 (SC) at para. 17 held that in respect of food crops covered under KLUO, the holder of the land has to obtain permission from the Collector to utilise the land for other purposes. KLUO would be applicable, if the Collector has necessary power in terms of KLUO, in respect of the land covered therein which depends upon the food crops under cultivation.

4. The State by amending the Act 28 of 2008, after Section 3 inserted Section 3A, which reads as follows:

"3A. Power to regularise the conversion or reclamation of paddy land made before the commencement of the Act.- Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or any other Act, rules or orders for the time being in force or in any judgment, decree or order of any court, tribunal or other authority, where before the commencement of this Act, any owner, occupier or the person in custody of any paddy land had undertaken conversion or reclamation of the said paddy land otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of any other Act existing at that time, the Collector may, regularise such conversion or reclamation in such manner as may be prescribed, by recovering a fee equal to 25 percent of the fair value of the said land notified under section 28A of the Kerala Stamp Act, 1959 (17 of 1959) or the fair value of adjacent land of similar nature, if the fair value of said land is not notified."

5. Thereafter, Rules have been framed in the light of the amendment, namely, the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land (Regularisation of Unauthorised Reclamation) Rules, 2015 and in said the Rules, under Rule 2(c) "unauthorised reclamation" is defined as follows:

"(c) "Unauthorised reclamation" means any act or a series or acts whereby a paddy land is converted irreversibly and in such a manner that it cannot be reverted back to the original condition by ordinary means, without obtaining permission under any law for the time being in force, before the 12th day