Point of law: Under Section 81(3) of Kerala Land Reforms Act, Government can exempt any holding from provisions of ceiling area, for public purpose.

JUDGMENT :

The petitioner, an incorporated Company, is before this Court aggrieved by Ext.P26 notice issued by the Village Officer, Eloor requiring the petitioner to stop filling up of land in their possession.

2. The petitioner states that in anticipation of the establishment of International Container Transshipment Terminal at Vallarpadam, Kochi, the petitioner-Company started a Container Freight Station and Logistic Service Centre at Eloor, which is first of its kind in India. The Company was established in the year 2000, logistic services were started in the year 2003 and the Container Freight Station was established in the year 2007.

3. The Company has 24.5 Acres of land in Old Survey Nos.121, 122 and 123 (Resurvey No.1, Block No.93) of Eloor Village, abutting the 'Vallarpadam Container Terminal Road'. The petitioner has established various services and facilities like Cargo Moving Facility, Supply Chain Management, Container Freight Station, Fuel Station, Weigh Bridge, Dormitories for Container Lorry Drivers and Staff, Bank, Toilets, Godowns, Parking Spaces, Truck Maintenance Workshop, Customs Bonded CFS area, etc. in the land.

4. The petitioner-Company possessed 24.5 Acres of land. As per the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963, the ceiling on land holdings is 15 Acres. Under Section 81(3) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, the Government can exempt any holding from the provisions of the ceiling area, for public purpose. Since the petitioner is providing a logistic park facilitating smooth traffic of Containers, which was a requirement of the International Container Transshipment Terminal, the Government of Kerala in public interest exempted 9.7295 Hectares of land in Re-Survey No.1 of Block No.93 as per Exts.P16 and P17.

5. In Ext.P20 report, the Village Officer, Eloor stated that the land specified therein in Survey Nos.121, 122 and 123 was not cultivated for long duration, that there is a Puramboke Thodu on the eastern side and that filling up of land is not likely to cause waterlogging in the area. By Exts.P21 to P23 orders, the Additional Secretary to Government and the Revenue Divisional Officer accorded sanction under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 to convert 5.33.727 Acres, 5.70.551 Acres and 11.04.278 Acres respectively, to use for non-agricultural purposes.

6. In the total extent of land, about 1.84 Acres of land in Survey No.121/5, 6, 7, 8, 10 and 11 remained unfit for vehicular parking in the rainy season. In a meeting convened by the District Collector, the petitioner was required to provide facilities for parking Tanker Lorries of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. in that area in order to avoid parking/waiting of Tanker Lorries on the side of Container Road awaiting their turn for fueling. When the petitioner started levelling of the said 1.84 Acres of land, the Village Officer issued Ext.P26 notice directing the petitioner to stop levelling, as the land is described as 'Nilam' in Revenue records.

7. The Senior Counsel assisted by the counsel for the petitioner argued that Ext.P26 has been issued ignoring the fact that the land has been granted exemption under the Kerala Land Reforms Act for the specific purpose of starting a Container Freight Yard. Proceedings under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 were also issued permitting the petitioner to use the land for non-agricultural purposes. The KLU orders were prior to the promulgation of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 and the land was converted prior to the year 2008.

8. The petitioner is not intending to make any construction in the land. The petitioner is only levelling the land, which stands converted before 2008 when the Act, 2008 came into force. The Village Officer has no authority to issue any Stop Memo. The petitioner is utilising the land for which the Company has been given exemption under the Kerala Land Reforms Act and permissions under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order. Ext.P26 is therefore liable to be quashed, urged the S