Back
2013 Supreme(Online)(KER) 19989
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J
ABDUL HAKKEEM P A – Appellant
Versus
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,ERNAKULAM – Respondent
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) 27235/2013
Land designated as 'Nilam' can be used for industrial purposes if it is proven that it doesn't qualify as paddy or wet land under applicable laws.
Headnote:
Property - Writ Petition - Kerala Land Utilization Order - Section 6 - The court ruled that land classified as 'Nilam' can still be utilized for industrial purposes if proven not to be paddy or wet land, per interpretations of relevant precedents.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner owns land classified as 'Nilam' despite claiming it is dry land used for industrial purposes and has filed a writ petition due to inaction from authorities on their application to use the land differently under relevant laws.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the property in question is not classified as paddy or wet land, thus the provisions of Act 28 of 2008 do not apply. The petitioner was advised to file under Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order to utilize the property for industrial purposes.
Issues: Whether the petitioner can use the land classified as 'Nilam' for industrial purposes despite its designation and without action from the authority.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that land not categorized as paddy or wet according to the law is eligible for usage change, referencing precedents that uphold the rights of landowners in such situations.
Final Decision: The petitioner can file a petition under Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order to utilize the land for industrial purposes.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is stated as the owner of 24.17 Ares of property in Re.Sy.No.257/13-2. 257/12-2. 257/7/4 and 8.30 Ares of property in Re.Sy.No.258/17 of Vengola Village, Kunnathunadu Taluk. According to the petitioner, the property is dry land and various industries are situated in the nearby properties. It is stated that property is not a 'paddy land' or 'wet land' as defined under the relevant provisions of Act 28 of 2008 . It is also stated that the petitioner is also satisfying land tax as borne by Exts.P1 and P2. The grievance of the petitioner is that, the property however happened to be described as 'Nilam' in the BTR. Though the petitioner filed application before the first respondent, no action has been taken by the said respondent till date. Hence the writ petition.
2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.
3. The law is well settled that, if the property is not a paddy land or wet land as on the date of commencement of the Act, the provisions of Act 28 of 2008 are not attracted by virtue of the decision inJaffarkhan v. Kochumarakkar ( 2012 ( 1) KLT 491). In such circumstances, the claim W.P.(C)No.27235/2013 2 has to be considered with reference to the provisions of the Kerala Land Utilization Order , as made clear by this Court as per the decision inPraveen v. Land Revenue Commissioner ( 2010 (2) KLT 617 . By virtue of the law declared by the Division Bench of this Court inSunil v. Killimangalam- P anjal Vt h Ward, Nellulpadaka Samooham ( 2012 (4) KLT 511 ), it has been made clear that the beneficiary is entitled to make use of the land even for industrial purposes
4. In the above facts and circumstances, the petitioner is set at liberty to file a proper petition before the first respondent under 'Clause 6' of the Kerala Land Utilization Order , so as to make use of the property for other purposes than agricultural purpose, within 'two weeks' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If any such petition is filed within the time as above, the same shall be considered and appropriate orders shall be passed by the first respondent in the light of the above observations, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, at the earliest, at any rate, within 'two months' thereafter.
The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the first respondent for further steps.
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE sv.
W.P.(C)No.27235/2013 2
