Back
2018 Supreme(Online)(KER) 41589
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
A. K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, J
V HASHIM – Appellant
Versus
FEROKE MUNICIPALITY – Respondent
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) 15594/2018
Authorities must act within specified timelines to ensure procedural fairness in land utilization matters.
Headnote:
Land - Land Utilization - Kerala Land Utilisation Order Clause 6 - The court directed authorities to expeditiously handle applications for land exclusion and conversion based on established procedural timelines.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought to remove their land from the Land Data Bank and requested approvals under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, leading to the writ petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court ordered the 3rd respondent to decide on the land exclusion request within three months and the 1st respondent to rule on the conversion application within one month thereafter.
Issues: Whether the petitioners are entitled to timely consideration of their applications for exclusion and conversion of land use.
Ratio Decidendi: Procedural fairness and statutory obligations require authorities to address land claims expediently and in accordance with prescribed timelines.
Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed with directions for timely processing of land exclusion and conversion applications.
J U D G M E N T
The 1st petitioner has preferred Ext.P4 application before the 3rd respondent, seeking a deletion of his land comprising of 0.0643 hectares of property in Re.Sy.No.388/2-7 of Feroke Village of Kozhikode Taluk and District, from the Land Data Bank prepared for the region. Similarly, the petitioners have preferred Ext.P5 application before the 1st respondent for passing appropriate orders under Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order . The limited prayer is for a direction to the 3rd and 1st respondents to consider and pass orders on the applications preferred by the petitioner, expeditiously, after hearing the petitioner.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as also the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.
On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the bar, I dispose the writ petition with the following directions:
(i) The 3rd respondent shall consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 application preferred by the 1st petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, if need be, after hearing the petitioner.
(ii) In the event of the 3rd respondent passing an order excluding the land belonging to the petitioners from the Land Data Bank, then the 1st respondent shall consider Ext.P5 application preferred by the petitioners for conversion of user of the said land, and pass orders thereon within a period of one month from the date of production of the order of the 3rd respondent, before him.
(iii) The petitioner shall, in the event of receipt of the order from the 3rd respondent, and the order from the 1st respondent permitting conversion under the KLU Order, produce copies of the same before the Land Tax Authorities, for causing a fresh assessment and consequential change in classification of the land in the Basic Tax Register.
