IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS THURSDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 29TH PHALGUNA, 1941 WP(C).No.8810 OF 2020(A)

PETITIONER:

SARASA.M AGED 59 YEARS W/O.SATHYAN.P., SHAHIDA QUARTERS, THANKAKUNNU P.O., THAZHE CHOVVA, KANNUR-670 018 BY ADVS.

SRI.T.T.MUHAMOOD SRI.A.RENJIT SRI.V.E.ABDUL GAFOOR SRI.A.MOHAMMED SAVAD SRI.C.Y.VINOD KUMAR RESPONDENTS:

1 THE STATE OF KERALA, REP BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, AGRICULTURAL DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004

2 THE DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT, FARMERS WELFARE DEPARTMENT, DIRECTORATE OF AGRICULTURE, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001

3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, KANNUR-670002

4 THE SECRETARY, CHIRAKKAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT, CHIRAKKAL.P.O., PIN-670 011

5 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN, CHIRAKKAL, P.O.VALAPATTANAM, KANNUR-670 010

6 LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE, CHIRAKKAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REP BY ITS CONVENOR, THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHIBHAVAN, CHIRAKKAL P.O., VALAPATTANAM, KANNUR-670 010

7 THE DISTRICT LEVEL AUTHORIZED COMMITTEE KANNUR, REP BY CONVENOR, THE PRINCIPAL AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, CIVIL STATION, KANNUR-670 010 SRI.K.J.MANU RAJ, GOVT.PLEADER, SRI.I.V.PRAMOD, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

19.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

===========================

W.P(C) No.8810 of 2020 ===========================

Dated this the 19^th day of March, 2020

JUDGMENT

The prayers in the above Writ Petition (Civil) are as follows:

“i) A writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing Ex:P7 order issued by the 3^rd respondent.

ii) A writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing Ex:P2 order issued by the 7^th respondent.

iii) A writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order of direction, directing the respondents to grant permission to construct the residential building in the land owned by the petitioner in Sy.No.96/1A of Chirakkal Village.

And such other writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstance of the case.”

2. Heard Sri.T.T.Muhamood, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.K.J.Manu Raj, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 & 5 to 7 and Sri.I.V.Pramod, learned counsel appearing for the 4^th respondent (Chirakkal Grama Panchayat).

3. The petitioner is aggrieved by the rejection of her request for construction of a residential building in a small extent of land coming to an extent of 10 cents lying within the limits of the 4^th respondent-Grama Panchayat. According to the petitioner, the provisions covering the field is that as per clause (i) of Sec.5(3) as well as the Proviso to clause (i) of Sec.5(3) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008. Provisions are also made in Sec.9(1) as well as its Proviso. A combined reading of these provisions would make it clear that initially the request for such permission as to be considered by the Local Level Monitoring Committee, who has to render its recommendation in the matter. Provided the request is for permission for filling the paddy land for an extent not more than 4.04 Ares in a Panchayat or an extent of 2.02 Ares in Municipality/Corporation area, for the construction of the residential building for the owner of the paddy land. Thereafter, the final decision in the matter is to be rendered by the District Level Authorized Committee in terms of the provisions contained in Sec.9(1) and the Proviso to Sec.9(1) of the said Act. The relevant considerations to be borne in mind by the District Level Authorized Committee are those enumerated in Sec.9(8) of the said Act. Sec.9(6) provides that, where anyone has a grievance against the decision of the District Level Authorized Committee, then the person concerned has the right to prefer an appeal before the District Collector, within 13 days, etc. The petitioner woul