The court determined that a conversion fee for land use change was improperly levied against the petitioner based on prior rulings.

JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed with following prayers:

i. To issue a writ of certiorari or such other appropriate order or writ quashing Exhibit P4 and declare that the petitioner is not liable to pay any conversion fee for conversion of her Land mentioned in Exhibit P3 to dry land/purayidam.

ii. Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ, order or direction, directing the 3rd respondent to pass appropriate orders on Ext P3 -Form 6 application for changing the nature of land to dry land/Purayidam without imposing any conversion fee, as expeditiously as possible.

iii. Any other appropriate, Writ, order or direction as deemed fit and proper by this Hon’ble Court to grant in the interests of justice.

iv. to dispense with the filing of the translation of the vernacular documents.

(SIC)

2. Petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P4 communication by which the petitioner is directed to pay conversion fee of Rs.92,400/- for processing hte Form-6 application. The petitioner relied on the decisions reported in Shiji Joshy v. State of Kerala [2022 (7) KHC 502] and Reeta John v. State of Kerala [2023 KHC 9383].

3. Heard the learned Government Pleader also.

4. It is not in dispute that the point raised in this writ petition is covered in favour of the petitioner in the light of the decisions reported in Shiji Joshy’s case (supra) and Reeta John’s case (supra). If that is the case, I think Ext.P4 can be set aside.

Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of in the following manner:

1. Ext.P4 is set aside.

2. The 3^rd respondent/Authorised O directed to process the Form-6 application, if it is otherwise in order, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

sd/-