Back
2014 Supreme(Online)(KER) 46140
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
A. Muhamed Mustaque, J
ABDUL KHADER – Appellant
Versus
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR – Respondent
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) 5953/2013
Property reclamation before Act 28 of 2008 can lead to reclassification if the Local Level Monitoring Committee determines it is not nilam.
Headnote:
Property - Reclamation - Act 28 of 2008 - The court focused on the Local Level Monitoring Committee's authority to reconsider land classifications and the implications of property reclamation prior to the enactment of Act 28 of 2008.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioners claim ownership of land in specific survey numbers and seek a direction for correcting its classification in the Basic Tax Register, asserting it has been reclaimed and should not be classified as nilam.
Finding of the Court:
The court determined that the Local Level Monitoring Committee must evaluate the property's status against the provisions of Act 28 of 2008 to ascertain if it can be classified differently based on its reclamation history.
Issues: Whether the property can be correctly classified considering its reclaimed status in light of Act 28 of 2008.
Ratio Decidendi: The applicability of Act 28 of 2008 to land classification issues hinges on the reclamation date, demanding an assessment by the Local Level Monitoring Committee.
Final Decision: The writ petition is disposed of, directing the Local Level Monitoring Committee to evaluate the property classification within six weeks.
JUDGMENT
Petitioners claim to be the owner in possession of property in survey No.154/4, 154/5-2 and 154/7-2 of Perumbavoor Village. Petitioner has approached this Court seeking for a direction to the second respondent to consider the application for correcting details in the Basic Tax Register.
2. Learned Government Pleader on instruction submits that this property is included as nilam in the draft data bank.
3. Petitioner has a case that this property has been reclaimed long before the Act 28 of 2008 and it appears, the property is a dry land.
4. Petitioners submit that the property was reclaimed long before the Act 28 of 2008. The remedy available to the petitioners is to approach the Local Level Monitoring Committee to correct the details of properties situated in Survey No.154/7. Local Level Monitoring Committee shall consider the application in the light of the decision in Castlerock Projects and Developers Pvt. Ltd. and Another v. Revenue Divisional Officer [ 2013 (3) KLT 545 ] and find out whether as on the date of enactment of Act 28 of 2008, this property can be treated as nilam. If it is found that this property cannot be treated as nilam, the Local Level Monitoring Committee shall correct the details in the draft data bank. Once the entry is corrected, it is open for the petitioner to approach the District Collector, Ernakulam under clause (6) of the Kerala Land Utilization Order for utilising the land for other purposes. Needful shall be done by the Local Level Monitoring Committee within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners.
Writ Petition is disposed of as above.
