Land converted prior to the enactment of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act is exempt from the Act's provisions and may be developed with proper permissions.

J U D G M E N T

Petitioner owns an item of property. It is stated that though a portion of the said property was originally a paddy land, the same was converted as a garden land several years prior to the introduction of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 ('the Act'). It is also stated by the petitioner that the petitioner is running a hotel in the buildings in the property for the last about twenty-five years. The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition is that since a portion of the property is described as 'Nilam' in the revenue records as also in the Data Bank prepared in accordance with the provisions contained in the Act, the application preferred by the petitioner for grant of building permit to construct WPC 31757/17 2 an additional building in the property is not being considered by the local authority. According to the petitioner, since the property was converted long prior to the Act, the same should not have been shown in the Data Bank as 'Nilam'. The petitioner, therefore, preferred Ext.P6 application for correction of the entry relating to that property in the Data Bank. The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition concerns the inaction on the part of the Local Level Monitoring Committee constituted under the Act in considering the request made by him in Ext.P6 application.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader.

3. The learned Government Pleader submits that Ext.P6 application preferred by the petitioner for correction of the entry in the Data Bank is not in the prescribed form.

4. If the property of the petitioner is one converted prior to the Act, the provisions of the Act would WPC 31757/17 3 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 do not apply to the property of the petitioner, he is entitled to make use of the property for construction of building, after obtaining permission of the competent authority under Clause 6 of the Land Utilization Order, 1967 (Kerala) [See Puthan Purakkal Joseph v. Sub Collector (2015(3) KLT 182)].

In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to prefer an application in the prescribed for correction of the entry relating to his property in the Data Bank prepared under the Act within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is also directed that if the petitioner prefers an application as directed above, the same shall be considered by the Local Level Monitoring Committee constituted under the Act, of which the additional fourth respondent is the Convener, after obtaining a report from the Kerala State Remote Sensing WPC 31757/17 4 and Environment Centre (KSRSEC) as to the position of the property which is shown in the Data Bank as paddy land at the time of commencement of the Act. The petitioner shall pay the fees stipulated by the KSRSEC for issuing their report as and when directed so by the additional fourth respondent. The direction aforesaid shall be complied with, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If the request made by the petitioner is allowed, the petitioner will be free to prefer an application invoking Clause 6 of the Land Utilization Order, 1967 (Kerala) before the second respondent for permission to make use of the property for other purposes and in that event, the second respondent shall pass orders on that application, within one month thereafter in the light of the decision of this Court in Puthan Purakkal Joseph (supra), untrammelled by Circular No.46848/P1/2016 dated 22.12.2016 issued by the Government. If the request of the petitioner under Clause 6 of the Land Utilization Order is granted, he shall WPC 31757/17 5 be issued the building permit, if he is otherwise entitled to the same.