HIGH COURT OF KERALA
SIBY ANTONY – Appellant
Versus
ASSISTANT ENGINEER – Respondent
Petitioner is the owner of an extent of 12.14
ares of property situate in Sy.No. 837/1A of
Kothamangalam Village. Property was a reclaimed
land, converted more than 50 years back. The nature
of the property shown in the data bank constituted
as per the provisions of the Kerala Conservation of
Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008 (herein after
referred to as the Act, 2008) as converted land.
Petitioner thereupon made an application under
Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967,
seeking permission for utilisation of the property
for other purposes other than paddy cultivation and
agricultural operations. Petitioner submitted an
application for building permit and thereafter
secured Ext.P4 judgment whereby certain directions
were issued to the Secretary of the Municipality for
consideration of the application submitted by the
3
petitioner. Evidently, petitioner has secured an
order from the Revenue Divisional Officer that is
Ext.P5, subject to certain conditions including the
financial commitments prescribed under Section 27 A
of the Act, 2008 as amended by Act, 2018. It was
also directed to secure necessary orders in the
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.