SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 71648

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DEEPU PAUL – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) 33677/2015



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ MONDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 28TH MAGHA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 33677 OF 2015 PETITIONERS:

1 DEEPU PAUL, AGED 43 YEARS S/O. M.J.PAUL, MUKKADAYIL HOUSE, 36/2601, AZAD ROAD, KALOOR, KOCHI - 682 017.

2 CHRISTINA ABRAHAM W/O. DEEPU PAUL, MUKKADAYIL HOUSE, 36/2601, AZAD ROAD, KALOOR, KOCHI - 682 017.

3 M.J.THOMAS MUKKADAYIL HOUSE, 41/3146A, ST.VINCENT ROAD, KOCHI - 682 018.

4 RANI THOMAS, W/O. M.J.THOMAS, MUKKADAYIL HOUSE, 41/3146A, ST.VINCENT ROAD, KOCHI - 682 018.

BY ADVS.

SRI.S.SHANAVAS KHAN SMT.S.INDU RESPONDENTS:

1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR COLLECTORATE, ERNAKULAM - 682 030.

3 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER FORT KOCHI, ERNAKULAM - 682 001.

4 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, THIRUVAMKULAM, THRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM - 682 305.

5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, THIRUVAMKULAM, THRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM - 682 305.

6 THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, THRIPUNITHURA MUNICIPALITY, ERNAKULAM - 682 305.

OTHER PRESENT:

SMT.RASHMI.K.M,SENIIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.02.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

P.M. MANOJ, J ----------------------

W.P.(C) No.33677 of 2015 ------------------------------------------------------

Dated this the 17th day of February, 2025

JUDGMENT

The writ petition is preferred, being aggrieved by the issuance of Exts.P10 and P11, whereby these applications for utilisation of land for other purposes under the provisions of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order have been rejected.

2. It is the case of the petitioners that they are the owners and in possession of 1 Acres 35 Cents and 97 Square Links of land situated in Re Survey Nos. 170/1, 2, 3, 184/2, 3 and 183/6 in Block No.10 of Thiruvamkulam Village, Ernakulam, District. It is further contended that the said property has been lying as a barren land for more than 75 years. The surrounding properties were already developed and the entire property was covered by residential buildings. However, the said property was classified as ‘Nilam’ in the revenue records. Even on an earlier occasion, the petitioner approached the then Thiruvamkulam Panchayat which was later merged with Thripunithara Municipality, for getting a development permit. On considering the said application, the Panchayat has already recommended for getting development permit. The said decision of the erstwhile Thiruvamkulam Panchayat is produced as per Ext.P2. This is the circumstance in which the petitioners preferred Ext.P3 application under Clause 6(2) of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order (in short KLU Order), 1967.

3. For the expeditious disposal of the application, the petitioners have also preferred W.P.(C) No.18413 of 2010. By disposing the said writ petition, a direction was given to the 2nd respondent to consider the matters in accordance with law, as per Ext.P5 judgment. Thereafter, in compliance with the direction, the 3rd respondent obtained a report from the 5th respondent for considering the application under Clause 6(2) of the KLU Order, 1967. For that purpose, the 5th respondent conducted an inspection of the property and reported that the property has been lying as fallow land for more than twenty years and as per the statement given by the localites, it appears that the land has been lying as fallow for more than thirty years. On an earlier occasion, the District Collector, Ernakulam has given a direction to convert the land after improving the drainage facility and from the reply received from the Greater Cochin Development Authority it appears that the property lies in the residential zone. Due to various reasons like unprofitability in the agricultural sector, non-availability of workmen, scarcity of water and reluctance to work in the polluted water, no agricultural activities were co

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top