IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN THURSDAY, THE 7^TH DAY OF APRIL 2022 / 17TH CHAITHRA, 1944 WP(C) NO.13007 OF 2022 PETITIONER :-

G.VINAYAN, AGED 63 YEARS S/O.GOVINDAN NAIR (LATE), PULARI HOUSE, KADATHY MARKET P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA - 686 661.

BY ADVS.

RINNY STEPHEN CHAMAPARAMPIL ASHA ELIZABETH MATHEW RESPONDENTS :-

1 THE TAHASILDAR (LAND RECORDS)

TALUK OFFICE, MUVATTUPUZHA - 688 673.

2 THE VILLAGE OFFICER VILLAGE OFFICE, VALAKOM, MUVATTUPUZHA - 686 669.

BY SMT.PRINCY XAVIER, SR.GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.04.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 7 ^th day of April, 2022 This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief :-

“i) Issue a Writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction commanding the 1^st respondent to reassess and reclassify the petitioner's 59.75 “Ares of land comprised in Survey No.410/11 of Valakom Village in Muvattupuzha Taluk as Dry land/Purayidom in BTR and other revenue records based on Exhibits P2 order issued under Section 27A of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008. .

ii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction commanding the 2^nd respondent to make appropriate corrections in the Village records including the BTR recording the classification of the petitioner's 59.75 Ares of land comprised in Survey No.410/11 of Valakom Village in Muvattupuzha Taluk as Dry land/Purayidom based on Exhibits P2 order issued under Section 27A of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008.

iii) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction declaring that the 1^st respondent is legally bound to reassess and reclassify the petitioner's 59.75 Ares of land comprised in Survey No.410/11 of Valakom Village in Muvattupuzha Taluk as Dry land/Purayidom in BTR and other revenue records based on Exhibits P2 Order issued under Section 27A of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008.”

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had submitted applications for use of the petitioner's property for other purposes and permission has been granted by Ext.P2 order with regard to 59.75 Ares of land. It is submitted that the further steps for change/alteration/inclusion in the Basic Tax Register are not being taken in terms of Section 27C in so far as 59.75 Ares of land belonging to the petitioner is concerned. The petitioner has, therefore, submitted Ext.P3 representation before the 1^st respondent and seeks a consideration thereon.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue stands squarely covered by the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in District Collector, Ernakulam and others v. Fr.Jose Uppani and others [2020 (4) KLT 612]. The learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the entry to be made in the revenue records should not be as 'converted land', since there is no such classification of land as provided in the relevant enactments and that in view of the conversion duly carried out by the petitioner, the land should be shown as 'garden land/dry land/purayidom' in the altered Basic Tax Register.

5. Having heard the learned Government Pleader also, I am of the opinion that the application submitted by the petitioner is liable to be considered in accordance with law, taking note of the judgments of this Court in District Collector, Ernakulam and others v. Fr.Jose Uppani and others [2020 (4) KLT 612] and in Iype Varghese v. Revenue Divisional Officer, Idukki and others [2020 (5) KLT 403]. If the facts stated are found to be correct and if the application is liable to be considered, then, the appropriate steps shall be taken for correction of the entry/alteration of the revenue records by entering the property as garden land/dry land/purayidom.

Ther