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.

JUDGMENT :

P.M. MANOJ, J.

The writ petition is preferred by the owner of an extent of 105.81 Ares of property comprised in Re-survey Nos. 157/3, 4, 5, 6, and 160/1, along with another property having an extent of 50 Ares with a building in RS No. 157/2 in Block No. 19 of Kunnumma Village in Kuttanadu Taluk. Altogether, the contiguous holdings amount to 155.81 Ares (385 Cents).

2. The challenge raised in this writ petition is primarily against certain conditions prescribed in Ext. P5 order passed by the 3rd respondent. The petitioner also seeks a declaration that he is entitled to utilise 105.81 Ares (comprised in RS Nos. 157/3, 4, 5, 6, and 160/1 in Block No. 19) for the cultivation of plantain, vegetables, and tubers. This entitlement is claimed on the strength of the direction given by the 3^rd respondent, asserting that it constitutes a valid permission under Clause 6(2) of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 (for short ‘KLU Order’).

3. Originally, the petitioner obtained permission under Clause 6(2) for converting a limited extent of land in RS Nos. 157/3, 4, 5, 6, and 160/1 (in Block No. 19). This conversion was specifically for a strip of land 6 meters in width and 125 meters in length, intended to provide access to the property having an extent of 50 Ares in RS No. 157/2 of Kunnumma Village. This permission was granted as per the order of the Sub Collector, Alappuzha, dated 17.12.2013. However, it was later realised that, on the strength of the order dated 17.12.2013, the petitioner had reclaimed a much larger extent of property. Consequently, the District Collector issued directions to inspect the property and take necessary steps against the unauthorised reclamation.

4. Accordingly, an inspection was conducted on 07.01.2015. It was realised that, on the strength of the order dated 17.12.2013, the petitioner had unauthorisedly reclaimed a large extent of prop- erty. A further inspection was conducted on the same day, 07.01.2015, involving the Agricultural Officer, Tahsildar (Kuttanad), and Village Officer (Kunnumma). During this inspection, the follow-ing was observed:

- There are 55 yielding coconut trees and 60 coconut saplings in the property.

- The reclaimed property is suitable for the cultivation of plan- tains, vegetables, and tubers.

- Water channels suitable for irrigation are present around the property.

- Cultivating paddy lands is also visible around the property.

5. Accordingly, certain directions were issued to the petitioner, the Tahsildar (Kuttanad), the SHO (Pulinkunnu), and the Secretary (Kavalam Grama Panchayat):

1. The landowner shall take steps to cultivate the land with the abovementioned crops (plantain, vegetables, and tubers) within 45 days, failing which, the Tahsildar (Kuttanad) is authorized to take action for the cultivation of the said land by giving the land under auction.

2. In case any activities are noted on the property that change its nature, the Tahsildar (Kuttanad) and the SHO (Pulinkunnu) are authorized to initiate proceedings for the attachment of those articles used for such activities.

3. No activities or construction other than agriculture shall be done on this property as per the Kerala Land Utilisation (KLU) Order. The Tahsildar must ensure that no construction works are executed on the property.

It was further directed that, as the land is agricultural, the Secretary (Kavalam Grama Panchayat) shall not grant any permission for construction in the property comprised in Survey Nos. 157/3, 4, 5, and 160/1, 2 of Kunnumma Village.

6. However, treating the order issued under Clause 7 as a declaration that the land was not paddy land and not suitable for paddy cultivation, the petitioner preferred WP(C) No. 341