SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Ker) 595

N THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
Kunhimoideenkutty – Appellant
Vs.
Marakkara Grama Panchayat – Respondent
W.P.(C) No.518 of 2016 & connected cases
Decided on : 03-08-2018

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :T. Sethumadhavan (Sr. Advocate), K. Mohanakannan, K.N. Abhilash, A.R. Pravitha, R. Bindu (Sasthamangalam), M.P. Prasanth, Jacob E. Simon, Sunil Nair Palakkat, R. Ramadas, K.B. Gangesh, Athira A. Menon, Smitha Chathanarambath, Amal S. Nair, K. Praveen Kumar, P.P. Jacob, M.R. Jayalatha, T.B. Hood, M. Isha, Amal Kasha, M.M. Salim, P.T. Shahul Hameed, R. Sudhish, M. Manju, P.B. Sajith, C.S. Manilal, S. Nidheesh, K. Praveen Kumar, T.P. Pradeep, Nithya Vijayan, P.K. Sathees Kumar, S. Sreedev, Santhosh Mathew, Karthika Maria, Maria Roy, Veena Ravendran, Anil Sebastian Pulickel, Arun Thomas, Jennis Stephen, Vijay V. Paul, K. Shibili Naha, C.R. Jayakumar, B.N. Haskar, Domson J. Vattakuzhy, N. Raghuraj, S. Suraja, V.S. Salim, K.S. Haseena, H. Nujumudeen, V.M. Krishnakumar, M. Shaju Purushothaman, K.S. Rajesh, V. Rajendran (Perumbavoor), George Varghese Kizhakkambalam, N. Rajesh, C.M. Mohammed Iquabal, P. Abdul Nishad, Jeena Joseph, V.J. Sumi Liza, G.D. Panicker, V.V. Nandagopal Nambiar, Smitha (Ezhupunna), Dheeraj Krishnan Perot, Eldho Paul, Tessy Jose, C.K. Sreejith, R. Santhosh Babu, Alexander Joseph, R. Rajeev Menon, K.I. Sageer Ibrahim, Latheesh Sebastian, Joy George, Praicy Joseph, Tanya Joy, Vino Jose, Shakthi Prakash, Bobby Thomas, Avaneesh Koyikkara, S. Sreekumar (Kollam), Saijo Hassan, P. Parvathy, Surya P. Shaji, Benoj C. Augustin, V.K. Rafeek, U.M. Hassan, Vishnu Bhuvanendran, V. Beena, Anand B. Menon, Anzil Salim, Manu Sankar, K.B. Arunkumar, S. Rekha Kumari, Ranjith Babu, M.V. Balagopal, Saiby Jose Kidangoor, Parvathy Vijayan, S. Sibha, Benny Antony Parel, Mathews Raju, P.M. Mohammed Salih, Jamsheed Hafiz & T.S. Sreekutty, Adv.
For the Respondent: Ranjith Thampan, I.V. Pramod, Government Pleaders (M.A. Hanilkumar, Paul Abraham & K.J. Manuraj), Sr. Government Pleader (P.M. Manoj), Sareena George & N. Deepa, Adv.

Headnote:Land Utilization Order 1967 (Kerala), Cl. 6(2) - Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act 2008 (Kerala), S. 27A (as amended by Act 29 of 2018) - The application can be taken into account and consideration by the Revenue divisional officer as for the purpose of agricultural crops as under section Clause 6(2) of Kerala Land Utilization Order.

JUDGMENT

The captioned Writ Petitions are materially connected in respect of the issues raised by the petitioners in accordance with the provisions of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land & Wet Land Act, 2008 (for brevity, ‘Act, 2008’) and Rules, and the amendments made to thereunder as per the Amendment Act, 2018 vis-a-vis the provisions of the Kerala Land Utilization Order, 1967. Therefore, I heard them together and propose to deliver a common judgment.

2. According to the petitioners, despite the fact that the properties are remaining as ‘garden lands’, it is remaining in the Basic Tax Register as well as in the revenue records as ‘paddy fields’/’Nanjas’. However, in some cases, they are included in the data bank constituted as per the provisions of Act, 2008. Thereupon, applications are filed under the provisions of Act, 2008, for removing the properties from the data bank, and also applications are submitted under Clause 6(2) of the Kerala Land Utilization Order, 1967, before the jurisdictional Revenue Divisional Officers/District Collectors, seeking permission for utilization of the properties for different purposes other than paddy cultivation.

3. Now, as per the amendment Act, 2018, “unnotified lands” are also brought under the purview of Act, 2008 by including Clause (xviiA), by amending S.2 which read thus:

“(xviiA) “unnotified land” means the lands within the area of jurisdiction of the Committee which have been included as paddy land or wetland in the basic tax register maintained in Village Offices, but are not notified as paddy land or wetland under sub-section (4) of Section 5 or where data bank has not been published under the provisions of clause (I) of sub-section (4) of Section 5, the lands which have already been filled up on the date of commencement of this Act and are not paddy land according to the report of the Kerala State Remote Sensing Centre and the Local Level Monitoring Committee or where the report of the Kerala State Remote Sensing Centre is not available, lands which are not paddy land according to the report of the Local Level Monitoring Committee”.

Likewise, S.14 of the principal Act is amended and after the words “a wetland”, the words “or an unnotified land, nature of which has been changed in contravention of the provisions of this Act” shall be inserted.

4. That apart, S.27A is introduced to the Act, which deals with change of nature of unnotified land, which reads thus:

“27A. Change of nature of unnotified land.– (l) If any owner of an unnotified land desires to utilise such land for residential or commercial or for other purpose, he shall apply to the Revenue Divisional Officer for permission in such manner as may be prescribed.

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in any judgment, decree or order of any Court or Tribunal or any other authority, the Revenue Divisional Officer may, after considering the reports of the Village Officer concerned, pass such orders as deems fit and proper on such applications, ensuring that there is no disruption to the free flow of water to the neighbouring paddy lands, if any, through such water conservancy measures as is deemed necessary:

Provided that, if the area of such parcel of land where the application is allowed is more than 20.2 ares, ten per cent of such land shall be set apart for water conservancy measures.

(3) If the application is allowed, the applicant shall be liable to pay a fee at such rate as may prescribed:

Provided that, no such fee shall be collected if the applicant proves that the land where the application is allowed is, filled up or naturally filled up before the 4th day of July, 1967, the date of commencement of the Kerala Land Utilization Order, 1967, after completing such procedure, as may be prescribed.

(4) If the application is allowed, the Revenue Divisional Officer shall ensure that the reclamation of the unnotified land shall not adversely affect the cultivation of paddy or any other crops, if any, in the adjoining land and shall





















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top