Lands reclaimed prior to the commencement of the Kerala Land Utilization Act, 2008 may be utilized for industrial purposes if not classified as 'paddy' or 'wet'.

JUDGMENT

The petitioners are stated as owners of the property having an extent of 78.22 Ares situated in concerned Thandaper Nos.1092, 2316, 10411, 11213, 7054 & 9573 of Vengola village. According to the petitioners, the land in question is 'dry land' having been reclaimed decades ago and that the petitioners are running ply wood factories in the concerned property. According to the petitioners, though the land in question is a pucca 'dry land', it has been described as 'Nilam' in the revenue records. The grievance of the petitioners is that, though the petitioners have preferred Ext. P9 representation before the District Collector/first respondent for effecting correction in the revenue records so as to enable the petitioners to enjoy the property in a proper manner, the same is still to be considered by the said respondent. Hence the challenge.

2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, the petitioners will be satisfied, if a direction is given to the first respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext. P9 representation within a reasonable time.

4. The law has been declared as per the decision rendered inJafarKhan Vs. K.A. Kochumarakkar & Ors. [ 2012 (1) KHC 523 ] that the provisions of the Act 28 of 2008 are applicable only in respect of the lands which were lying as 'paddy land' and 'wet land' as on the date of commencement of the 'Act'. It has been declared by a Division Bench of this Court inPraveen Vs. Land Revenue Commissioner ( 2010 (2) KLT 617 ) that, if the property concerned is not a 'paddy land' or 'wet land', as on the date of commencement of Act 28 of 2008, the application if any preferred, is to be considered under the relevant provisions of the Kerala Land Utilization Order, so as to enable the party to make use of the property for other than agricultural purpose. It has been further made clear by a Division Bench of this Court inSunil Vs, Killimangalam Panchal 5th Ward Nellulpadaka Smooham ( 2012 (4) KLT 511 ) that, the land reclaimed prior to the commencement of the relevant 'Act' can be made use of, even for 'Industrial purpose'.

5. In the said circumstances, the first respondent is directed to finalize the proceedings pursuant to Ext. P9 representation preferred by the petitioners, in accordance with law and in the light of the decisions cited supra. The proceedings as above shall be finalized, after hearing the petitioners, at the earliest, at any rate, within 'two months'

from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The petitioners shall produce a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of the writ petition, before the 1st respondent for further steps.

The Writ Petition is disposed of.