Back
2017 Supreme(Online)(KER) 4680
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P. B. Suresh Kumar, J
PARAMESWARAN N – Appellant
Versus
AAGRICULTURAL OFFICER – Respondent
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) 31686/2016
The law permits properties converted from paddy land prior to the introduction of conservation legislation to be utilized for other purposes, contingent upon proper authority permissions.
Headnote:
Land - Conservation - Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act Section List - The court analyzed the legality of land use changes under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008, emphasizing the importance of accurate data in the corresponding databases and the authority of local committees to amend records for applications concerning land use.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioners claimed their paddy lands had been converted to garden lands prior to the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008. They were denied building permits and number assignments for constructed buildings due to their properties being recorded as paddy land. They sought permission to use their properties for other purposes and corrections in revenue records.
Finding of the Court:
The court concluded that if the properties were converted before the Act came into force, the Act’s provisions would not apply. It directed the competent authority to review the petitions for permission under the Kerala Land Utilization Order after local committee inspections to verify conversion claims.
Issues: The key issues included whether the properties were eligible for conversion under the existing laws and whether the local committees were authorized to amend the database records influencing land use permissions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court utilized precedents to clarify the applicability of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, noting that properties converted prior to the Act are exempt, allowing the competent authority under the Kerala Land Utilization Order to permit their use for other purposes.
Final Decision: The court directed the competent authority to process the applications for land use permissions based on the findings from local committees within specified timelines.
J U D G M E N T
The properties of the petitioners referred to in the writ petitions were though paddy fields originally, it is stated that the same have been converted as garden lands prior to the introduction of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act , 2008 ('the Act'). The case of the petitioners in the writ petitions is that since their properties are described as paddy land in the revenue records, they are unable to make use of the same for other purposes including construction of buildings. It is alleged in some of the writ petitions that the applications preferred by the petitioners therein for building permits are not being considered for the aforesaid reason. In some other writ petitions, it is alleged that the buildings constructed by the petitioners therein are not being numbered on account of the said reason. In most of the writ petitions, the specific case of the petitioners is that their properties are shown as converted prior to the coming into force of the Act in the Data Banks prepared under the Act. In the remaining writ petitions, the case of the petitioners is that their properties are not shown as paddy land in the Data Banks. The petitioners, therefore, preferred applications before the competent authority under the Kerala Land Utilization Order , 1967 seeking permission to use the properties for other purposes including construction of buildings. The applications preferred by the petitioners in this connection are part of the records. The petitioners seek directions in these writ petitions to the competent authority under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order to grant permission sought for by them to make use of the properties for other purposes. In some of the writ petitions, the petitioners seek orders for correction of the entry relating to their properties in the revenue records also. Some of the petitioners, among others, seek directions to the local authorities concerned to grant building permits applied for by them and some others seek directions to the local authorities concerned to assign numbers to the buildings constructed by them on the strength of the building permits issued to them.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as also the learned Government Pleader.
3. The learned Government Pleader submits that there are mistakes in the draft and final Data Banks published under the Act and by virtue of the provisions contained in the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland (Amendment) Rules, 2017, the Local Level Monitoring Committees are authorised to carry out appropriate corrections in the Data Banks. According to the learned Government Pleader, before granting the permission sought for by the petitioners, it has to be ensured that the properties involved in these matters are not properties which are liable to be included in the Data Banks.
4. If the properties of the petitioners are converted prior to the Act, the provisions of the Act would not apply to the same, as held by the Apex Court in Revenue Divisional Officer v. Jalaja Dileep ( 2015(1) KLT 984 ). If the provisions of the Act would not apply to the properties of the petitioners, they are entitled to make use of the same for other purposes, after obtaining permission of the competent authority under Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order [SeePuthan Purakkal Joseph v. Sub Collector ( 2015(3) KLT 182 )]. In Puthan Purakkal Joseph (supra) and Shivadasan v. Revenue Divisional Officer ( 2017(3) KLT 822 ), this Court has dealt with the scope of the power of the competent authority under the Kerala Land Utilization Order in dealing with the applications for permission preferred for use of the properties for other purposes.
In the circumstances, the writ petitions are disposed of directing the competent authority under the Kerala Land Utilization Order to pass orders on the applications preferred by the petitioners for permission to use their properties for other purposes in the light of the decisions of this
