SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 13875

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Murali Purushothaman, J
ASHRAF ALI – Appellant
Versus
THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, – Respondent


JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by Ext.P6 whereby Form 5 application submitted by him has been rejected by the Revenue Divisional OfÏcer.

2. The petitioner is the absolute owner in possession of an extent of 0.0800 Hectares of land in Block No.50, Re.Sy.No.221/5-5 of Ayilur Panchayat and Village, Chittur Taluk in Palakkad District.

3. According to the petitioner, the aforesaid property will not come within the ambit of paddy land or wet land. However, it has been wrongly included in the Data Bank prepared under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008. The petitioner, therefore, filed an application in Form 5 under the provisions of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 (for short, ‘the Act, 2008’) to remove the property from the Data Bank. The Revenue Divisional OfÏcer by Ext.P6 order rejected the application on the ground that the LLMC had examined the application in detail and reported that the land is presently water logged and there are paddy fields nearby and the land is fit for paddy cultivation.

4. The petitioner impugns Ext.P6 contending, inter alia, that the same is vitiated by non application of mind and

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top