Back
2018 Supreme(Online)(KER) 51788
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
SHAJI P.CHALY, J
SHERLY – Appellant
Versus
DISTRICT LEVEL AUTHORIZED COMMITTEE – Respondent
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) 14582/2018
The need for prompt administrative consideration of land use applications under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order to enhance effective land management.
Headnote:
Land - Ownership - Kerala Land Utilisation Order - Sections 1-3 - The court directed expeditious consideration of land use applications based on existing property classifications in revenue records, emphasizing timely resolutions to promote effective land utilization.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner owns 0.4310 Ares of land classified as Nilam in revenue records, despite its use as dry land. The petitioner has submitted applications for reclassification and utilising the land for different purposes.
Issues: Whether the petitioner's application for consideration under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order should be expedited given the existing classification of the property in the revenue records.
Ratio Decidendi: The court highlighted the need for timely administrative actions in land use matters and the importance of resolving ambiguities in land classification to facilitate intended utility.
Final Decision: The court directs timely consideration of land applications within specified timeframes.
JUDGMENT
Petitioner is the owner of an extent of 0.4310 Ares of property situate in Re-Survey No. 242 of Vandazhi Village, Alathur Taluk, Palakkad district. According to the petitioner, the land was remaining as dry land, however, in the Basic Tax Register as well as in the revenue records, the property is still shown as Nilam. Thereupon, the petitioner has submitted Ext. P4 application before the second respondent, which is pending consideration. So also, in order to utilize the property for a different purpose, petitioner has submitted Ext. P5 application under the provisions of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order before the fourth respondent. Petitioner seeks direction for early consideration of the aforesaid application.
Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Senior Government Pleader, there will be a direction to the second respondent to consider Ext. P4 application at the earliest possible time, and at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If the petitioner is able to secure an enabling order from the second respondent, Ext. P5 application shall be considered by the fourth respondent in accordance with law and attain finality at the earliest possible time, and at any rate, within three months from the date of production of the order from the second respondent. Petitioner is also directed to produce a copy of the writ petition along with the appended documents before the respective statutory authorities.
