IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
S.MANIKUMAR, SHAJI P.CHALY, JJ.
M.K. Baby, D/o. Kumara Pillai – Appellant
Versus
District Collector Collectorate, Civil Station, Ernakulam - 682 030 – Respondent
WP(C) No. 3797, 12912, 15069, 22598, 22786, 27812 of 2020, 6046 of 2021
Decided on : 22-10-2021
Kerala Conservation of Paddy land and Wetland Act, 2008 - section 27A to section 27D- Kerala Conservation of Paddy land and Wetland Rules, 2008 - Unnotified paddy lands - Challenging the constitutional validity of section 27A – Constitutionality of the very same provisions on the ground that the State was not right in introducing such amendments relaxing the imperative conditions of the act quite contrary to the legislative intentions and purpose of the act.
Finding of the Court: Circular is also an unconstitutional one for the fundamental reason that, it is an inroad into the powers exercised by this Court on the principles of separation of powers, and further that, by introducing the circular, the State Government has attempted to interpret the Schedule to the Rules, which by itself is a rule, and for that matter the entire contents of the circular insofar as it is violative of the provisions of the Act 2008 and the Rules 2008 is impermissible in law.
Result: Writ petition disposed of
JUDGMENT :
SHAJI P.CHALY, J.
Captioned writ petitions are filed challenging the constitutional validity of section 27A to section 27D of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy land and Wetland Act, 2008, hereinafter called, “Act, 2008” and the consequential provisions of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy land and Wetland Rules, 2008, hereinafter called, “Rules, 2008”, and for other related and consequential reliefs. These writ petitions were posted before the Division Bench tagged along with writ petitions seeking similar reliefs already referred to the Division Bench for authoritative consideration, in accordance with the provisions of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958 and the Rules thereto.
2. In fact hundreds and hundreds of writ petitions filed by owners of unnotified paddy lands, challenging the constitutional validity of aforesaid provisions, are pending before this Court. It is important to note that the Act, 2008 was amended and introduced various provisions so as to tackle various situations including the aspect of the reclamation and conversion of the paddy lands which are not included in the data bank prepared as per the provisions of the Act, 2008. Sections 27A to 27D were introduced on and w.e.f. 30.12.2017 along with the definition of unnotified land as per section 2(XVIIA), and incorporating other amendments. Section 27A was introduced into the statute in order to enable the owner of any unnotified land who desires to utilise such land for residential or commercial or other purposes, to apply to the Revenue Divisional Officer for permission, in such manner as may be prescribed. Unnotified land is defined to mean, “the land 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 by the 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”. Prior to the aforementioned amendments, such aspects were dealt with under the provisions of the Land Utilisation Order 1967, a State legislation prepared by virtue of the powers conferred by the Essential Commodities Act 1955, a Central enactment. We are informed that some public interest writ petitions are also pending challenging the Constitutionality of the very same provisions on the ground that the State was not right in introducing such amendments relaxing the imperative conditions of the act quite contrary to the legislative intentions and purpose of the act .
3. It is only for the purpose of understanding the issues raised in the writ petition and in view of the order proposed to be passed by us, the above aspects are dealt with. In fact, we intend to dispose of these writ petitions leaving open the challenge made to the constitutionality of the provisions, because, consequent to the amendment made to the Schedule constituted as per rule 12(9) of the Rules, 2008, there is no requirement for payment of fees / charges for conversion up to and inclusive of 25 cents of Paddy land, on and with effect from 25.02.2021.
4. Rule 12(9) of the Rules, 2008 prescribes that if permission is granted to utilise any unnotified paddy field for other purposes in contemplation of Section 27A, the State Government is vested with powers to impose fees/charges in accordance with the Schedule of Rules, 2008. As per the amended schedule, reclamation of any paddy land up to 25 cents is not liable to be imposed with any fee w.e.f. 25.02.2021. However, the properties exceeding 25 cents and up to 1 Acre a
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.