Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.
Joy – Appellant
Vs.
Revenue Divisional Officer – Respondent
W.P.(C) No.33071 of 2019
Decided on : 14-12-2020
Paddy Land - Land Classification - Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 - Section 2(xii), Section 3, Section 5 - The court considered the definition of paddy land under the Act, the prohibition of conversion or reclamation of paddy land, and the power of the Local Level Monitoring Committee to include and exclude paddy land in the data bank. The court emphasized the importance of the natural features of the land in determining its suitability for paddy cultivation and highlighted the authority's discretion to delete lands from the data bank based on ground realities.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought to exclude their land from the paddy land data bank, which was rejected by the Local Level Monitoring Committee (LLMC). The petitioner challenged the decision, arguing that the land was not suitable for paddy cultivation.
Finding of the Court:
The court declared that the petitioner's land should be classified as converted land prior to 12.08.2008 and allowed the petitioner to use the land accordingly. The court set aside the LLMC's decision and directed the necessary corrections to be made within a month.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner's land qualified as paddy land under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008, and if the LLMC's decision was legally sustainable.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of the natural features of the land in determining its suitability for paddy cultivation and highlighted the authority's discretion to delete lands from the data bank based on ground realities.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, the impugned order was set aside, and the petitioner was granted the right to use the land as converted land prior to 12.08.2008. The LLMC was directed to make the necessary corrections within a month, and the petitioner was allowed to approach the first respondent with an application under section 27A.
JUDGMENT :
This writ petition is filed by the owner of 98.04 cents of land comprising in re-survey Nos.128/6 and 128/4 in Block No.19 of Manakunnam Village, Kanayannoor Taluk. The property is classified as paddy land in the data bank.
2. The petitioner submitted an application before the Local Level Monitoring Committee vide Ext.P4 to exclude the land from the data bank. It was directed to be considered by LLMC by the judgment of this Court in writ petition No.16583 of 2018 dated 23.05.2018.
3. The LLMC considered the application and communicated to the petitioner by Ext.P6 order rejecting the request.
4. The petitioner again approached this Court with writ petition No.29797 of 2018. Pending the writ petition, the petitioner also obtained a report from the Kerala State Remote Sensing and Environment Centre (KSREC). Ext.P8 is the report. It is appropriate to refer the relevant observations and conclusion in the report.
As per the toposheet of 1967, the survey plot 128/4 was observed as paddy land. The plot was observed under crop land towards northern part and with plantations/trees towards southern part with buildings/structure towards eastern corner in the data of 16/01/208 (Fig.4). Same landuse pattern was observed in the data of 04/01/2011 (Fig.5), 08/02/2015 (Fig.6) and 11/01/2018 (Fig.7)”
“OBSERVATIONS & CONCLUSION
The analysis has been carried out from all available data sets of toposheet (1967) and different satellite data sets of 2008, 2011, 2015 and 2018 for the survey plot.
As per the toposheet of 1967, the survey plot 128/4 was observed as paddy land. The plot was observed under crop land towards northern part and with plantations/trees towards southern part with buildings/structure towards eastern corner in the data of year 2008. Same landuse pattern was observed in the data of year 2011, 2015 and 2018.
As per the toposheet of 1967, the survey plot 128/6 was observed as paddy land. The plot was observed under plantations / trees in the data of year 2008. Same landuse pattern was observed in the data of year 2011, 2015 and 2018.”
5. This Court disposed of the writ petition No.29797 of 2018 by judgment dated 17.07.2019 directing the LLMC to take a decision again in the light of the KSREC report.
6. The LLMC took a fresh decision pursuant to the direction of this Court and the request was rejected again. In the order it is observed that there are 25 years of old coconut trees. However, it is noted that after the removal of coconut trees, cultivation of paddy is possible. This order is under challenge in the writ petition.
7. This Court has to consider whether the land is a reclaimed land prior to 12.08.2008, the date on which Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 came into force. The paddy land is defined under section 2 (xii) as follows:
8. The intention of the legislature as seen from the definition itself is to maintain the land which is referred as paddy land in the definition as on 12.08.2008. This is clear from the recital to the preamble of the legislation. It is clearly stated in the recital that the Act is intended to conserve paddy land and wetland and restrict its conversion.
9. Section 3 of the act prohibits conversion or reclamation of paddy land after the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 came into force. Section 5 refers to the constitution of Local Level Monitoring Committee. The power of the Local Level Monitoring Committee is enumerated in Section 5 itself. The Local Level Monitoring Committee has the power to include and exclude the paddy land in the data bank prepared under the Act.
10. What are the parameters to treat a land as a paddy land as per the enactment is the sole question to be consid
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
