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

2024 Supreme(Ker) 362

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
Ashique S/o Muhammed Musthafa – Appellant
Versus
Revenue Divisional Officer – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner: P.M. Ziraj Irfan Ziraj, Advs.
For the Respondents: Smt. Sheeba – GP

JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by Ext.P3 order whereby Form 5 application submitted by him has been rejected by the Revenue Divisional Officer.

2. The petitioner is the owner in possession of an extent of 11.16 Ares of land comprised in Sy.No.85/3-25 of Aliparamba Village, Perinthalmanna Taluk in Malappuram District.

3. According to the petitioner, the aforesaid property will not come within the ambit of paddy land or wet land as defined under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 2008’). However, it is stated that the property is wrongly included in the Data Bank. The petitioner filed an application in Form 5 under Rule 4(d) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008 (for short, ‘the Rules’) before the Revenue Divisional Officer to remove the said land from the Data Bank. The same has been rejected by the Revenue Divisional Officer vide Ext.P3 stating that as per the report of the Agricultural Officer, the property is not converted before 2008 and the property need not be removed from the Data Bank.

4. The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P3 contending,

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