Prior permissions under Rule 6 exempt applicants from newly imposed requirements under recent amendments in land utilization laws.

JUDGMENT

The above writ petition has been filed challenging Ext.P5 stop memo and Ext.P10 notice. The petitioner has also sought for other consequential reliefs.

2. It is averred that the petitioner is the absolute owner is in possession of properties having an extent of 2 Acres 32 cents comprised in various survey numbers of Nattika Village, which is essentially a coconut plantation. The properties are classified as reclaimed land in the data bank and as Nilam in the revenue records. While so, the petitioner applied for a building permit before the 4^th respondent and the same was rejected for the reason that the property is classified as Nilam in the revenue records and that building permit can be issued only upon getting an order under Rule 6 of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order . Thereupon the petitioner preferred an application dated 08.08.2016 seeking permission under Rule 6 of the before the 2^nd respondent, which was ultimately granted as per Ext.P2 order dated 08.02.2017. By Ext.P2, the 4^th respondent was directed to grant permit for construction of house/building in the aforesaid properties. Thereupon the petitioner submitted an application for building permit, which was granted as per Ext.P3. The consent to establish the farm was also granted to the petitioner by the Kerala State Pollution Control Board. Since the property is not a level land, he undertook steps to level the property. Thereupon Ext.P5 stop memo was issued. The petitioner submitted Ext.P6 reply, wherein it is contended that he has not acted in violation of Exts.P2 and P3 KLU permissions and that the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act is not applicable to the subject property. While so, a portion of the property was notified for acquisition for widening of the National Highway. Thereupon the petitioner dropped the idea of constructing a commercial building and has decided to construct a residential building on the strength of Ext.P2 order and an application for building permit was submitted, which was rejected a per Ext.P10, wherein it is stated that the 4^th respondent can give permission only to construct a residential house having built up area of 120 sq.m in property having a maximum extent of 4.04 ares, if the said property is shown in the data bank as converted and in the revenue records as wetland and that the extent of property of the petitioner exceeds 4.04 ares. It is in the said circumstances that the petitioner has approached this Court.

3. The petitioner would submit that, when the matter came up for consideration on 03.11.2021, this Court has issued an interim order as follows:

“ Admit.

Learned Government Pleader takes notice for respondents 1,2 and 5. Learned Standing Counsel takes notice for respondents 3 and 4. In view of Ext.P2 order, there will be an interim direction to the 4th respondent to take up Ext.P9 application submitted by the petitioner for building permit and to consider and pass orders on the same untrammeled by Ext.P10 order and without reference to the objections that an application under section 27A has to be submitted by the petitioner, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Post on 05-01-2022”

Thereafter the building permit application was allowed as per Ext.P11 order and the petitioner commenced the construction as per the building permit. Necessary Transit Passes have been issued to the petitioner to excavate ordinary earth from his adjacent property as per Exts.P12 and P13. While transporting the ordinary earth based on the above said orders, Ext.P14 stop memo has been issued stating that the petitioner is unauthorisedly filling the land classified as "Nancha" with ordinary earth. Thereafter the petitioner co