IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
VIJU ABRAHAM, J
Sunny Thomas, S/o. Late Varkey Thomas – Appellant
Versus
Sub Collector, Thiruvalla, Pathanamthitta – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
W.P(C) No.4012 of 2021 is filed challenging Exts.P15 and P23 orders. By Ext.P15 the Village Officer has taken a decision that the property having an extent of 16 Ares comprised in Re-survey No.55/7 in Resurvey Block No.5 (Old Survey 229) of Nedumpram Village in Thiruvalla Taluk is a paddy land. The said finding in Ext.P15 was confirmed by the District Collector by Ext.P23 order. It is to be seen that pursuant to the issuance of Ext.P23 in WP(C) No.4012 of 2021 a Contempt of Court proceedings was initiated by the petitioner as C.O.C. No.288 of 2022 which lead to Ext.P24 judgment produced in W.P(C)No.23869 of 2021. Based on which revised orders in the place of Ext.P23 order in WP(C) No.4012 of 2021 was issued as Ext.P25 and therefore, it is challenging Ext.P25 revised order that W.P(C) No.23869 of 2021 is filed. Therefore, W.P(C) No.23869 of 2021 will be treated as the leading case.
2. It is averred that the petitioner is a retired employee of the Airport Authority of India. The petitioner and his wife possess 16 Ares of landed property, a coconut plantation, comprised in Re-survey No.55/7 in Resurvey Block No.5 (Old Survey 229) in Thandapper 13640 in Nedumpram Village in Th
Indira P.S. And Others v. Sub Collector, Fort Kochi and Another
Shanawaz Mytheenkunju v. Village Officer, Keerikkad Village
Jessy Abraham v. Land Revenue Commissioner, Thiruvananthapuram
The classification of land in the Basic Tax Register is authoritative, and the Village Officer lacks jurisdiction to issue stop memos when the property is classified as 'purayidom'.
The Village Officer lacked jurisdiction to issue a stop memo for property classified as 'purayidom', emphasizing the importance of the Basic Tax Register in determining land classification.
The classification of land in the Basic Tax Register is authoritative, and a stop memo cannot be issued for 'purayidom' property under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008.
The court emphasized the importance of respecting previous judgments and orders, and the impermissibility of reopening concluded judgments.
The District Collector must consider all relevant evidence before passing orders affecting property rights under conservation laws.
The court mandates adherence to statutory procedures in assessing paddy land applications, emphasizing independent evaluations.
The statutory requirement of inspection by the authority before deciding on land classification must be strictly followed.
The competent authority must adequately assess land suitability for paddy cultivation when considering applications under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules.
The court ruled that prior permissions regarding land use are limited and require statutory application for any changes in tenure, reaffirming the need for compliance with land laws.
The competent authority must properly assess land characteristics as per statutory requirements before any exclusion from data banks under the relevant rules.
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.