High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeWrit petition disposed of with directions as st...

Abdul Azeez v. Revenue Divisional Officer / Sub-Collector, Perinthalmanna; Nilambur LLMC; Nilambur Municipality; Nilambur Taluk; Agricultural Officer, Nilambur; Village Officer, Nilambur

Case / Petition Number:WP(C).No.7142 OF 2020(P)

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • Alexander Thomas, J.
Judgment Date
2020-03-10
Court Decision / Holding
Disposal with directions: (1) It is affirmed that the LLMC has already taken a decision in the petitioner’s favour for deletion from the land data bank (Ext.P4) as reflected in Ext.P5. (2) The LLMC and other competent officials must ensure deletion from the data bank within six weeks from the certified copy of the judgment. (3) Since the LLMC has already taken a favourable decision, the 1st respondent need not await further for Ext.P12; it should process Ext.P12 for conversion under Sec.27A(1) of the 2008 Act after obtaining reports and providing copies to the petitioner, affording reasonable hearing, and render a considered decision within two months from the certified copy of the judgment. The petition stands disposed of with these directions.
Final Disposition
Writ petition disposed of with directions as stated above; LLMC to delete from data bank within six weeks; 1st respondent to consider Ext.P12 within two months and proceed with conversion after due procedure.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Abdul Azeez

Respondents

  • Revenue Divisional Officer / Sub Collector, RDO Office, Perinthalmanna, Malappuram District
  • Tahsildar (LR), Taluk Office, Nilambur
  • Local Level Monitoring Committee (LLMC), Nilambur Municipality, represented by its Convener, Agricultural Officer, Krishi Bhavan, Nilambur
  • Agricultural Officer, Krishi Bhavan, Nilambur, Malappuram
  • Village Officer, Nilambur Village, Nilambur, Malappuram

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Sri. P.K. Soyuz
  • • Sri. E.V. Babychan

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Sri. Saigi Jacob Palatty, Sr. Government Pleader

Case Synopsis & Summary

This writ petition (C) arises from a dispute over the classification and use of 12.85 acres of land in Nilambur Village, Nilambur Taluk, comprising Re.Sy. No. 181/2-3 and 181/2-4 in Block 92. The petitioner Abdul Azeez asserts joint ownership and possession of the land, which is currently classified as Nilam in revenue records and is neither Paddy land nor wet land under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 (Act 28 of 2008). He has filed Ext.P12 under Section 27A(1) seeking conversion of land use and permission to utilized the land for other purposes including construction; Ext.P6 and Ext.P7 relate to deletion of the land from the land data bank and Ext.P4/Ext.P5 show LLMC had, in 2015–16, taken a decision in the petitioner’s favour for deletion, though steps remained incomplete. The court revisited prior orders (Ext.P3 2014 judgment and Ext.P10 2018 judgment) directing LLMC to process deletion and directed the 1st respondent RDO to decide Ext.P12 within two months after ensuring due procedure, hearing, and disclosure. The judgment emphasizes expeditious completion of deletion from the data bank (within six weeks) and directs prompt consideration of Ext.P12 for conversion under Sec.27A(1). The petition is disposed of with these directions to safeguard legitimate rights and enable corrective revenue actions.

Provisions of Law Cited

Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 - Sec. 27A(1)Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 - Sec. 27C

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner contends that the subject land is not Paddy land or Wet land as defined under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 (Act 28 of 2008). Ext.P6 and Ext.P7 were filed before the LLMC for deletion from the data bank and Ext.P4/Ext.P5 records show that LLMC had, in 2015–16, taken a decision in his favour, but actual deletion steps were not completed. Ext.P12, dated 14.02.2020, under Section 27A(1) of the Act, seeks conversion of land use and permission to utilize the land for other purposes including construction. The petitioner seeks deletion from the data bank and reassessment of taxes, contending that the matter should be decided promptly in line with the court’s earlier directions (Ext.P3 and Ext.P10).

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents contend that LLMC had already taken a decision in the petitioner’s favour for deletion from the land data bank (Ext.P4), as evidenced by communications (Ext.P5), and that the formal deletion steps must be completed before Ext.P12 can be adjudicated. They emphasize adherence to prior orders and request timely action by the Revenue Department to complete the necessary steps and to proceed with Ext.P12 after deletion.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Salim v. State of Kerala2017(1) KLT 392Mentioned OnlyCited in the petition to support deletion of land from the data bank; the present judgment references it as context but does not apply its holding as binding precedent.
W.P.(C.) No. 4359 of 2014W.P.(C.) No.4359 of 2014Mentioned OnlyPast judgment cited (Ext.P3) for directing LLMC to act; treated as binding history of the instant matter, not as a new precedent.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Abdul Azeez v. Revenue Divisional Officer / Sub-Collector, Perinthalmanna; Nilambur LLMC; Nilambur Municipality; Nilambur Taluk; Agricultural Officer, Nilambur; Village Officer, Nilambur and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS** **TUESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 20TH PHALGUNA, 1941** ## **WP(C).No.7142 OF 2020(P)** ## **PETITIONER/S:** **ABDUL AZEEZ AGED 51 YEARS S/O. MOHAMMED KOTTAKUTH HOUSE, EDAKARA P. O., NILAMBOOR, MALAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679331.** **BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.SOYUZ SRI.E.V.BABYCHAN** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** **1 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER/SUB COLLECTOR RDO OFFICE, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679322. 2 THE TAHSILDAR (LR) TALUK OFFICE, NILAMBUR P. O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679 329. 3 THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE NILAMBUR MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER, AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN, NILAMBUR - 679 329. 4 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER KRISHI BHAVAN, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM - 679 329. 5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER NILAMBUR VILLAGE, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM - 679 329.** ## **OTHER PRESENT:** ## **SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, SR.GOVT.PLEADER** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **WP(C).No.7142 OF 2020(P)** **2** ## **ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.** ## **-----------------------------------------** **W.P.(C.) No. 7142 of 2020 ----------------------------------------Dated this the 10[th] day of March, 2020** ## **JUDGMENT** The case set up in the W.P.(C.) is as follows : That the petitioner is the joint ownership and in possession of 12.85 ares (31.75 cents) of land comprised in Re.Sy.No.181/2-3 and 181/2-4 in Block No.92 of |Nilamboor village, Nilamboor Taluk along with Mohammed Ali, s/o Mohammed. The abovesaid land is classified as Nilam in the Revenue records. The above said land is surround by building and other dry lands. The lands owned by the petitioner is neither 'Paddy land' nor 'wet land' as defined in Act 28 of 2008. Petitioner had submitted Ext.P12 application as per Section 27A of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and wet land Act. The 3[rd] respondent LLMC had not complied the direction in Ext.P10 judgment and not disposed Ext.P6 and P7 applications so far. Petitioner is aggrieved by the non-consideration of Ext.P6, P7 and P12 applications by the respondents 1 and 3. 2. In the light of these averments and contentions that the petitioner has filed the instant W.P.(C.) with the following prayers : **WP(C).No.7142 OF 2020(P)** **3** _“(i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 3[rd] respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P6 and P7 application in the light of Salim v. State of Kerala [2017(1) KLT 392 and Ext.P4 and P5 and correct the Data Bank of Nilambur Municipality by deleting 12.85 ares comprised in Re.Sy.No. 181/2-3 and 181/2-4 in Block No.92 of Nilamboor Village, from the Data Bank of Nilambur Municipality._ _(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 1[st] respondent to consider and dispose Ext.P12 application and grant permission to change of nature of the land and also, to utilize 1 2.85 ares comprised in Re-Sy.No. 181/2-3 and 181/2-4 in Block No.92 of Nilamboor Village, for other purposes including construction of building._ _(iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 2[nd] respondent to reassess the land tax and make necessary correction in the BTR and other revenue records as Purayidam/Dry land as per Section 27 C of the Act with respect to 12.85 Ares comprised in Re.Sy.No. 181/2-3 and 181/2-4 in Block No.92 of Nilamboor Village._ _(iv) Grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of this case including the cost of this writ petition.”_ 3. Heard Sri.P.K.Soyuz, learned counsel appearing for the pettioner and Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned senior Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 4. It appears that earlier this Court as per Ext.P3 judgment dated 19.3.2014 rendered in the W.P.(C.) No.4359/2014 filed by the petitioner had ordered that the petitioner may approach the Local Level Monitoring Committee and seek for appropriate orders for deletion of the subject property from the land data bank prepared as per the provisions of the Kerala conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 etc. Thereupon, the petitioner has filed the requisite application for deletion of the subject property from the land data bank before the 3[rd] respondent, LLMC. It appears from a reading **WP(C).No.7142 OF 2020(P)** **4** of Ext.P4 proceedings dated 23.9.2015 that the 3[rd] respondent, LLMC has substantively taken the decision in favour of the petitioner so as to delete the subject property from the land data bank. However, the actual steps to get the subject property deleted from the data bank was not duly completed by the 3[rd] respondent officials concerned and thereupon, the petitioner had approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.16253/2018 before this court in which this court has rendered Ext.P10 judgment dated 7.6.2018, wherein it is ordered that the 3[rd] respondent-LLMC should consider and pass orders on the applications filed by the petitioner as Exts.P9 and P10 therein in the light of the proceedings of the LLMC as per Ext.P5 therein (Ext.P4 herein) within one month. 5. The petitioner was also further directed after getting orders for deletion of the subject property from the land data bank, it is ordered that the 1[st] respondent-Revenue Divsional Officer shall consider and pass orders on the application filed by the petitioner as per Ext.P7 therein for conversion of the use of the land and pass orders thereon within one month after production of the order of the respondent, LLMC and thereafter, the petitioner was also permitted to approach the Land Tax authority for passing fresh assessment of the subject property for proper classification of the land in the Basic Tax Register. **WP(C).No.7142 OF 2020(P)** **5** 6. The grievance of the petitioner appears to be too fall. That even after rendering of Exts.P3 and P10 judgments, the actual steps for deleting the subject property from the land data bank has not been duly completed by the 3[rd] respondent and the other competent officials concerned even though substantively a decision has been taken by the LLMC in favour of the petitioner as can be seen from Ext.P4 proceedings dated 23.9.2015. Further, the second and more serious grievance of the petitioner is that Ext.P12 application submitted by the petitioner on 14.2.2020 under Sec.27A(1) of the amended provisions of the 2008 Act for conversion of the user of the land is pending consideration and could be proceeded further only after the 3[rd] respondent LLMC takes a decision to get the property deleted from the land data bank. 7. Taking note of the facts and circumstances of this case, the following orders and directions are passed : - _(1) It is ordered and declared that the 3[rd] respondent LLMC has already taken a decision in favour of the petitioner as per Ext.P4 proceedings dated 23.9.2015 of the 3[rd] respondent LLMC as reflected in Ext.P5 letter dated 15.2.2016 issued by the Secretary of the 4[th] respondent-Nilambur Municipality that the subject property of the petitioner is to be deleted from the land data bank._ - _(2) Consequent steps shall be immediately taken by the 3[rd] respondent LLMC and the other competent officials concerned to ensure that the subject_ **WP(C).No.7142 OF 2020(P)** **6** _properties got deleted from the land data bank, without any further delay, at any rate, within 6 weeks from the date of production of the certified copy of this judgment._ - (3) _Since the 3[rd] respondent LLMC has already taken a decision in favour of the petitioner as per Ext.P4 proceedings dated 23.9.2015, the 1[st] respondent Revenue Divisional Officer need not wait any further for consideration of Ext.P12 application, so as to await for completion of the actual steps to get the subject property deleted from the land data bank_ . 8. Any further delay would only be of detriment to the petitioner and it would also not be conducive to the interest of the revenue administration. Accordingly, it is ordered that the 1[st] respondent will immediately take a consideration the matter raised in Ext.P12 application dated 14.2.2020, after following the requisite procedure and after obtaining report from the competent revenue officials concerned and after ensuring that the copies of the reports are given to the petitioner in advance and after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner through the authorized representative/counsel, if any will render a considered decision so as to dispose of the request made by the petitioner as per Ext.P12 for conversion of the subject property under Sec.27A(1) of the 2008 Act, without much delay, within a period of 2 months from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment. **WP(C).No.7142 OF 2020(P)** **7** With these observations and directions, the above W.P.(C.) will stand finally disposed of. Sd/- **ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE** SKS **WP(C).No.7142 OF 2020(P)** **8** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 07.05.2019.** **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE DATA BANK.** **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.4359 OF 2014 DATED 19.03.2014. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES DATED 23.09.2015 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT LLMC.** - **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE SECRETARY, NILAMBUR MUNICIPALITY.** - **EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 22.11.17.** - **EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 22.11.17.** - **EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED FOR EXT.P6 BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 22.11.2017.** - **EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED FOR EXT.P7 BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 22.11.2017.** - **EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WRIT PETITION (C) NO.16253 OF 2018 DATED 07.06.2018.** - **EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD DATED 19.07.2018.** - **EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 27A DATED 14.02.2020 ALONG WITH COPY OF THE CHALAN.** - **EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 15.02.2020.**