Point of Law: Constitution of Local Level Monitoring Committee – Provisions of sub-section (4) of Section 5 that duty for preparation of data bank and the inclusion of lands in data bank as cultivable paddy land or wetland vest with Committee.

JUDGMENT :

The petitioner is the owner in possession of a total extent of 44.76 Ares of land comprised in Re.Sy.No.87/1 and 87/3 of Thavanur Village, Ponnani Taluk, Malappuram District. It is stated that, though the lands are classified in the revenue records as 'nilam' for about nearly 30 years, the lands were garden land with coconut, various plantains and other trees.

Through Ext.P1 notice dated 9.5.2014, the District Collector, Malappuram directed the petitioner to restore the land situated in Re-Sy.No.87/3 to its original condition as 'paddy land'. This order was challenged before this Court through W.P.(C)No.13290/2014. That writ petition was disposed of as under:-

“3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment reported in 2010 (2) KLT 617 (Praveen v. Land Revenue Commissioner) wherein it is held that the application of the Act is confined to paddy land and wetland alone and as per Section 3, except in accordance with the provisions of the Act, the owner or occupier or the person in custody of any paddy land shall not undertaken any activity for conversion or reclamation of such paddy land, after coming into force of the Act. It has been made clear that, if the land is not a paddy land or wet land as on the date of commencement of the Act, relief can be granted with reference to Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order.

4. Heard learned Government Pleader as well.

5. After going through the pleadings and proceedings, this Court finds that the matter requires reconsideration, more so, when the petitioner was never given any opportunity of hearing before passing Ext.P1. In such circumstances, Ext.P1 is set aside and the respondent is directed to reconsider the matter afresh after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned. The proceedings shall be finalized in accordance with law, as early as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment before the respondent for compliance.

Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of.” Pursuant to Ext.P2, the District Collector, Malappuram issued Ext.P3 order holding that the property is 'nilam' and directed the maintenance of status quo in respect of the property. Thereupon, the petitioner filed Ext.P4 application seeking correction of the entry classifying the property as 'nilam' in the Basic Tax Register. He also filed W.P.(C)No.32945/2014, which was disposed of directing the Local Monitoring Committee, Thavanur to conduct an inspection of the property and further directing that, if the land cannot be classified as 'paddy land', to carry out necessary corrections in the draft data bank. By a majority opinion, the Local Level Monitoring Committee, through Ext.P6 proceedings, held that the property had been converted much prior to the commencement of Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as the 2008 Act' for short) and that the coconut trees in the property were at least 20 years old. Despite the finding of the Local Level Monitoring Committee nothing further was done in the matter. The writ petitioner thereupon approached this Court alleging violation of the directions contained in W.P. (C)No.32945/2014. By Ext.P7 order in Contempt Case (C)No.1971/2016, this Court opined that the decision of the Local Level Monitoring Committee must be that of its majority and the Agricultural Officer, who was the lone dissenter cannot take a view outside the decision of the Committee. This Court also directed the petitioner to deposit the charges for obtaining satellite images of the property without prejudice to the contention of the petitioner that the majority decision of the Local Level Monitoring Committee will prevail over that of the Agricultural Officer. On coming to know that a fresh data bank is under preparation, the petitioner submitted Ext.P8 application again for correction of the entry in the data bank. T