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

2020 Supreme(Ker) 981

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
Alex P. Abraham – Appellant
Versus
Revenue Divisional Officer – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : V.M. Krishnakumar (Adv.)
For the Respondent: G. Ranjitha (GP)

JUDGMENT :

The petitioners approached the first respondent with an application under Section 3A of Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008. This application was for the purpose of regularisation of the land converted prior to the Paddy Land Act. Admittedly, the land is not included in the data bank as a paddy land. The application was acknowledged as early as on 24.02.2016.

2. Section 3A was incorporated to Act 28/2008 on 01.04.2015 and it was abrogated on 23.11.2016. Section 3A reads thus;

    “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 or 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 percen

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top