Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 5033
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
N. NAGARESH, J
VISHNU – Appellant
Versus
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR – Respondent
WP(C) 1189/2023
DEEPAK RAJ C.P.ROOPA
The court established that statutory applications regarding land use change must be considered by the appropriate authority within a reasonable time as mandated by law.
Headnote:
Paddy - Land Use - Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 - Sections 5(4)(i); Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008 - Rule 4(d) - The court mandates the consideration of applications for land use change in accordance with the statutory framework.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, owner of 2.33 and 1.93 Ares of land classified as garden land, sought to use the land for purposes other than agriculture and filed applications under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act after it was identified as 'Nanja' in the Data Bank.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the competent authority has a legal obligation to consider the applications made by the petitioner under the rules governing the conservation of paddy land and wetland within a reasonable time frame.
Issues: Whether the competent authority has a duty to consider the petitioner's applications for change of land use as per the relevant provisions of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act and Rules.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of the statutory right of the petitioner to have his applications considered promptly by the competent authority.
Final Decision: The court directed the Revenue Divisional Officer to consider the applications within two months.
J U D G M E N T
Dated this the 13th day of January, 2023 The petitioner is owner of 2.33 Ares and 1.93 Ares of land in Block No.2 of Moodadi Village of Koyilandi Taluk in Kozhikode District, has filed this writ petition seeking to direct the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.P5 and P6 applications within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
2. The petitioner states that he is owner of 2.33 Ares and 1.93 Ares of land situated in Survey Nos.20/7 and 20/35 of Block No.2 of Moodadi Village of Koyilandi Taluk in Kozhikode District. The land is a garden land. It is not cultivated with paddy. It is not fit for paddy cultivation either. However, the land is included in the Data Bank and is described as 'Nanja' in Revenue records also.
3. The petitioner wants to use the land for other purposes. Hence, the petitioner filed Exts.P5 and P6 applications in Form-5, invoking Rule 4(d) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008 . The applications were filed on 22.12.2022. The applications are not disposed of so far. Unless the applications are considered expeditiously, the petitioner will be put to untold hardship and loss, contends the petitioner.
4. Government Pleader representing the respondents resisted the writ petition. The Government Pleader controverted all material allegations made by the petitioner, in the writ petition. The Government Pleader, however, submitted that since the petitioner has invoked a statutory remedy under the provisions of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 , the applications submitted by the petitioner can be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law, provided the applications are received, are complete in all respects and are supported by all necessary documents.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader representing the respondents.
6. The petitioner is owner of 2.33 Ares and 1.93 Ares of land situated in Survey Nos.20/7 and 20/35 of Block No.2 of Moodadi Village of Koyilandi Taluk in Kozhikode District. The land is a garden land. The land is included in the Data Bank of paddy land and wetland prepared under Section 5 (4) (i) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 . According to the petitioner, the land owned by him is neither paddy land nor wetland. The land is not suitable for paddy cultivation. The petitioner wants to use the land for other purposes and hence he has filed Exts.P5 and P6 applications in Form-5 seeking to remove the land from Data Bank.
7. The Form-5 applications have been filed by the petitioner invoking his statutory right under Rule 4(d) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008 . The applications being statutory applications, the competent authority has a legal duty to consider the applications in accordance with law, within a reasonable time.
The writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the 2nd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer to consider Exts.P5 and P6 Form-5 applications submitted by the petitioner if the same are received, supported by all requisite documents and paying prescribed fee, if any, and to pass orders thereon in accordance with law, within a period of two months.
Sd/- N. NAGARESH JUDGE sss APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1189/2023 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE GIFT DEED NO:
1406/2021 OF KOYILANDY SUB REGISTRAR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO:
1362/2021 OF KOYILANDY SUB REGISTRAR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT IN THANDPERU NO: 2/1175 OF MOODADI VILLAGE OFFICE.
EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT IN THANDAPERU NO: 2/1179 OF MOODADI VILLAGE OFFICE.
EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF FORM NO: 5 APPLICATION NO: 2/2022/1391194 DATED 22.12.2022 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF FORM NO: 5 APPLICATION NO: 1/2022/1391194 DATED 22.12.2022 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF T
