J U D G M E N T

The above writ petition is filed with the following prayers:-

“(1) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order or direction by calling for the records leading to the issuance of Exhibit P5 order of the district collector and set aside the same as illegal (2) Direct the second respondent to issue an order under clause 6 of the Kerala land utilization order and thereby permit the petitioner to utilize his land for other purposes than cultivation (3) Declare that the district collector has no authority to direct any the local level monitoring committee to include a land in the draft data bank which already excluded by the committee after inspection.

(4) Issue such other writ or orders or directions, which this Honourable court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice and circumstances of the case.”

2. When this writ petition came up for consideration on 08.12.2015, this Court passed the following orders:-

“The directions of the District Collector to include the land in question in draft data bank is under challenge before this Court. This Court is of the view that the Local Level Monitoring Committee has to come to the conclusion independently whether it can be treated as a paddy or a wet land. Therefore untrammelled by any direction of the District Collector, the Local Level Monitoring Committee shall conclude the proceeding within one month and report before this Court whether it can be treated as a paddy or wet land. The learned Special Government Pleader is also directed to make available the satellite images of the property after the commencement and as well as on the date of enactment.”

3. Based on the above order, now a report is filed by the Convenor, Local Level Monitoring Committee, Kadungalloor. It will be better to extract the relevant portion of the order:

“2. As directed by this Honourable Court, the Agricultural Officer, Kadungallur, who is the Convenor of Local Level Monitoring Committee, Kadungallur Panchayat, along with other members of the Monitoring Committee had conducted an inspection on 04.01.2016. It is submitted that the petitioner is in possession of 35.33 Ares of land comprised in Survey Nos.199/18B, 222/8/2 and 222/8/2 of Kadungallur Village.

3. On inspection and enquiry, it is found that the land in possession of the petitioner was a 'paddy land' suitable for paddy cultivation at the time of commencement of Act 28 of 2008. The Local Level Monitoring Committee had omitted to include the land in the Draft Data Bank earlier. Subsequently, as directed by the District Collector, Ernakulam, the Local Level Monitoring Committee conducted an inspection and included the land possessed by the petitioner in the Draft Data Bank as 'paddy land' (Nilam). As directed by this Honourable Court, the Local Level Monitoring Committee again inspected the land and after verifying the satellite images and after conducting enquiry, it is decided to retain the land possessed by the petitioner in the Draft Data Bank as paddy land (Nilam). Copy of the satellite image of the year 2009 and 2014 are produced along with the report filed in W.P.(C)

No.37134/2015.”

4. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the property is included based on the directions issued by the District Collector in Ext.P5. It is submitted that the District Collector has no jurisdiction to issue such orders in Ext.P5. But a perusal of the report submitted by the officer concerned, it is clear that the report is prepared after inspecting the property. But if the petitioner is aggrieved by the inclusion of the property in the data bank or if he wants to remove its from the data bank, the petitioner has got remedies as per the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land And Wetland Act, 2008. If any From 5 application is filed as per the Act 28 of 2008, the officer concerned will consider the same, as immediately as possible.

All those contentions of the petitioner are left open.

Granting liberty to the petitioner to do the needf