HIGH COURT OF KERALA
N. NAGARESH, J
SHAMEER K.H., – Appellant
Versus
THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, – Respondent
WP(C)/41911/2022
Paddy Land - Writ Petition - Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 - Section 5(4)(i) and Rule 4(d) - The court ruled that the competent authority must consider the petitioner's application promptly, affirming the petitioner's statutory right under the relevant rules.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, owner of 1.69 Ares of non-paddy garden land, filed a writ petition for timely consideration of his application to remove his land from the paddy land Data Bank, asserting the land's unsuitability for paddy cultivation.
Finding of the Court:
The court emphasized the legal duty of the competent authority to consider the Form-5 application under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 within a reasonable time frame, thus granting the petitioner's request.
Issues: Whether the Revenue Divisional Officer is obligated to promptly consider the petitioner's application to have land removed from the paddy land Data Bank.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the application filed by the petitioner under relevant rules must be considered by the authority as it reflects a statutory right.
Final Decision: The Revenue Divisional Officer must consider the petitioner's application within three months.
J U D G M E N T
Dated this the 22nd day of December, 2022 The petitioner, who is owner of 1.69 Ares of land in Kunnathunadu Village of Kunnathunadu Taluk in Ernakulam District, has filed this writ petition seeking to direct the 1st respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 application within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
2. The petitioner states that he is owner of 1.69 Ares of land situated in Re-Survey No.311/4-1-5 in old Survey No.601/5A, 5B of Kunnathunadu Village, Kunnathunadu Taluk in Ernakulam 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 Data Bank and is described as paddy land in Revenue records also.
3. The petitioner wants to use the land for other purposes.
Hence, the petitioner filed Ext.P3 application in Form-5, invoking Rule 4(d) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008 . The application was filed on 21.11.2022. The application is not disposed of so far. Unless the application is considered expeditiously, the petitioner will be put to untold hardship and loss, contends the petitioner.
4. The 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 application submitted by the petitioner can be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law, provided the application is received, is complete in all respects and is 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 1.69 Ares of land situated in Re-Survey No.311/4-1-5 in old Survey No.601/5A, 5B of Kunnathunadu Village, Kunnathunadu Taluk in Ernakulam District. 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 an application in Form-5 seeking to remove the land from Data Bank.
7. The Form-5 application has 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 application being a statutory application, the competent authority has a legal duty to consider the application in accordance with law, within a reasonable time.
The writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the 1st respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer to consider Ext.P3 Form-5 application submitted by the petitioner if the same is 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 three months.
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.