High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeWrit petitions disposed of with directions to L...

Arun Krishna Dhan v. State of Kerala and Others

Case / Petition Number:W.P.(C).No.5692 of 2017 (J)

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • P.B.SURESH KUMAR
Judgment Date
2017-10-24
Court Decision / Holding
Writ petitions are disposed of with directions that petitioners may file corrections in the prescribed form before the Local Level Monitoring Committees to rectify Data Bank entries. The LLMCs shall obtain KSRSEC reports on the position of the properties as of the commencement of the Act, and, if applicable, consider permissions under Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order to allow use of the properties for other purposes, including issuing building permits or building numbers to those entitled. Decisions on such requests shall be made within one month of the petitioner's application and in light of Puthan Purakkal Joseph v. Sub Collector and Kizhakkambalam Grama Panchayat v. Mariumma, with tax reassessment as necessary. Where petitions are granted, relevant authorities shall issue permits/numbers and proceed under the Kerala Land Utilization Order. Three months from the copy of the judgment is the compliance timeline; further steps to be taken under the KLUO as applicable.
Final Disposition
Writ petitions disposed of with directions to LLMCs to correct Data Bank entries, consider prescribed-form applications, obtain KSRSEC reports, and proceed under Clause 6 of the KLUO as applicable, within three months; building permits/numbers to be issued if entitled, with related tax reassessment to be considered under the light of cited precedents.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Arun Krishna Dhan

Respondents

  • State of Kerala, represented by its Secretary, Department of Revenue
  • District Collector, Civil Station, Kudappanakkunnu
  • Village Officer, Attipra Village, Manvila
  • Agricultural Officer, Convenor, Local Level Monitoring Committee (L.L.M.C.)

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Adv. N. James Koshy

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Govt. Pleader Sri. M.V. Anandan

Case Synopsis & Summary

This batch of writ petitions before the Kerala High Court concerns the fate of properties recorded in the Data Bank under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008. The petitioners allege that their land, originally paddy land but converted into garden land long before the Act, has been wrongly included in the Data Bank, restricting the use of the property for development, construction, or building activity, and in some cases stalling grant of building permits or numbering of constructed buildings. They seek correction of Data Bank entries and related relief. Several petitions also press for permissions to use the land for other purposes under the Kerala Land Utilization Order (KLUO), including obtaining building permits or numbers for buildings already constructed. The respondents contend that LLMC procedures govern corrections and that applications must be in prescribed form. The court acknowledges the settled principle that pre-Act conversion may exempt properties from the Act’s application, citing Supreme Court authority in Revenue Divisional Officer v. Jalaja Dileep, and directs Local Level Monitoring Committees to address the corrections after obtaining KSRSEC reports and to consider permissions under Clause 6 of the KLUO, if warranted. The judgment emphasizes that if permitted, building permits or numbers may be issued, and related tax reassessments may follow. The orders are to be implemented within three months of receiving a copy of the judgment, with further actions under the KLUO as appropriate.

Provisions of Law Cited

Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008Kerala Land Utilization OrderClause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

Petitioners contend that their properties, though converted to garden lands prior to the Act, should be exempt from the Act’s prohibitions, and that erroneous Data Bank entries are preventing lawful use and development. They seek correction of Data Bank entries, restoration of building permits, and creation of building numbers where applicable, through LLMCs and under KLUO Clause 6 if warranted. They also request consideration of permissions and possible fresh land utilization steps following judicial guidance and KSRSEC reports.

Contentions of Respondents

Government contends that LLMC processes govern corrections and that applications must be filed in prescribed forms; impugnments should be resolved through the established procedures and orders directing authorities to act after due reports and within the timelines prescribed by the judgment.

Cited Precedents (3)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Revenue Divisional Officer v. Jalaja Dileep2015(1) KLT 984PositiveCited as authority for the proposition that pre-Act conversions may exempt properties from the Act’s applicability.
Puthan Purakkal Joseph v. Sub Collector2015(3) KLT 182PositiveUsed to justify moving under Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order and to consider permissions despite circulars.
Kizhakkambalam Grama Panchayat v. Mariumma2015(2) KLT 516PositiveCited to reflect timelines and procedural considerations under KLUO and related authorities.

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 Arun Krishna Dhan v. State of Kerala and Others 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 P.B.SURESH KUMAR** **TUESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2017/2ND KARTHIKA, 1939** **WP(C).No. 5692 of 2017 (J) ---------------------------** - **PETITIONER: -------------------** **ARUN KRISHNA DHAN, S/O.V. DHANANJAYAN NAIR, VILLA NO.25, LORDS COTTAGE, KARSHAKA ROAD, COCHIN-682 023.** ## **BY ADV. SRI.N.JAMES KOSHY.** **RESPONDENTS:** **------------------------** **1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.** **2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, KUDAPPANAKUNNU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 043.** **3. VILLAGE OFFICER, ATTIPRA VILLAGE, MANVILA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 583.** **4. AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, CONVENOR, LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE (L.L.M.C.), KRISHI BHAVAN, KAZHAKOOTTAM BLOCK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 582.** **BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.M.V. ANANDAN.** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24-10-2017, ALONG WITH WP(C). NO.7256 OF 2017 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** rs. ## **WP(C).No. 5692 of 2017 (J)** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-** - **EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE WEST SIDE (ROAD FACING) OF THE PROPERTY.** - **EXHIBIT P1(A) A TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE EASTERN SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.** - **EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED DOCUMENT NO.1214/93.** - **EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF SETTLEMENT DEED NO.2639/2011.** - **EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT NO.191/16 DATED 28.03.2016 ALONG WITH LOCATION MAHAZAR AND LOCATION SKETCH, SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE DRAFT DATA BANK CONTAINING THE ENTRY REGARDING PETITIONER'S PROPERTY IN OLD SURVEY NO.1874/18 (RE-SURVEY NO.242/1).** - **EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 20.04.2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE CONVENOR, LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE.** ## **RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:NIL.** ## **//TRUE COPY//** ## **P.S. TO JUDGE** rs. ## **P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J.** **--------------------------------------------** **W.P.(C).Nos.5692, 7256, 12638, 13294, 13612, 13818, 13849,** **17091 & 20441 of 2017** **---------------------------------------------------------------** **Dated this the 24[th] day of October, 2017** ## **J U D G M E N T** The case of the petitioners in this batch of writ petitions is that the properties owned by them as referred to in the writ petitions were originally paddy lands, but converted as garden lands several years prior to the introduction of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 ('the Act'). It is alleged by the petitioners that though the properties were converted as garden lands prior to the introduction of the Act, the properties are included in the Data Bank prepared under W.P.(c).No.5692 of 2017 & con. cases : 2 : the Act and as such, they are unable to make use the properties for other purposes including construction of buildings. It is alleged in some of the writ petitions that the building permits applied for by the petitioners therein are not being considered for the aforesaid reason. In some other writ petitions, it is alleged that the buildings constructed by the petitioners therein are not being numbered on account of the said reason. According to the petitioners, since the properties were converted prior to the Act, the same should not have been shown in the Data Bank. In most of the cases, petitioners have preferred applications before the Local Level Monitoring Committees concerned for correction of the entries relating to their properties in the Data Bank and the applications preferred by the petitioners for the said purpose are part of the records. The petitioners seek directions in these writ petitions to the Local Level Monitoring Committees concerned to correct the entires in the Data Bank in relation to their properties. They also seek orders for correction of the entry relating to their properties W.P.(c).No.5692 of 2017 & con. cases : 3 : in the revenue records. Some of the petitioners, among others, seek directions to the local authorities concerned to grant building permits applied for by them and some others seek directions to the local authorities concerned to assign numbers to the buildings constructed by them on the strength of the building permits issued to them. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as also the learned Government Pleader. 3. If the properties of the petitioners are converted prior to the Act, the provisions of the Act would not apply to the same, as held by the Apex Court in _**Revenue Divisional Officer** v._ _**Jalaja Dileep**_ (2015(1) KLT 984). But, the question whether the properties are converted prior to the Act as claimed by the petitioners is a matter to be considered by the Local Level Monitoring Committees at the first instance. It is all the more so since the Local Level Monitoring Committees are empowered to correct the mistake, if any, in the Data Bank. True, if the provisions of the Act do not apply to the properties of the petitioners, they W.P.(c).No.5692 of 2017 & con. cases : 4 : are entitled to make use of the properties for other purposes including construction of buildings, after obtaining permission of the competent authority under the Kerala Land Utilization Order [See _**Puthan Purakkal Joseph** v._ _**Sub Collector**_ (2015(3) KLT 182)]. 4. The learned Government Pleader pointed out that the applications preferred by some of the petitioners for correction of the entries in the Data Bank as referred to in the writ petition are not in the prescribed form. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the writ petitions are disposed of permitting the petitioners to prefer applications in the prescribed form, wherever such applications are not filed, before the Local Level Monitoring Committees concerned for correction of the entries in the Data Bank in relation to their properties. It is also directed that if the petitioners prefer applications in the prescribed form as directed above along with copies of the judgment and the writ petition, the same shall be considered by the Local Level Monitoring Committees concerned, after W.P.(c).No.5692 of 2017 & con. cases : 5 : obtaining reports from the Kerala State Remote Sensing and Environment Centre (KSRSEC) as to the position of the properties at the time of commencement of the Act. The petitioners shall pay the fees stipulated by the KSRSEC for issuing their report if directed so by the Conveners of the Local Level Monitoring Committees. Needless to say that in cases where reports have already been called for from the KSRSEC at the expense of the petitioners pursuant to interim orders passed in the writ petitions, orders shall be passed on the strength of the said reports. The direction aforesaid shall be complied with within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If the requests made by the petitioners are allowed, they are entitled to prefer applications invoking Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order before the competent authority viz, the District Collector/the Revenue Divisional Officer for permission to make use of the properties for other purposes, in cases where applications have not been filed by the petitioners for the said purpose and in that event, the competent authority W.P.(c).No.5692 of 2017 & con. cases : 6 : under the Kerala Land Utilization Order shall pass orders on those applications within one month from the date of production of the decision of the Local Level Monitoring Committee and the application under the Kerala Land Utilization Order, wherever applicable, along with a copy of the writ petition, 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 requests of the petitioners under Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order are granted, the petitioners shall be issued building permits or assigned building numbers, as the case may be, if they are otherwise entitled for the same, by the local authorities concerned. Needless to say that if the requests of the petitioners under Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order are granted, they will also be entitled to move the authorities under the Kerala Land Tax Act for fresh assessment of the lands as garden lands and if such requests are made by the petitioners, the same shall also be considered by the said W.P.(c).No.5692 of 2017 & con. cases : 7 : authorities, in the light of _**Kizhakkambalam Grama Panchayat v. Mariumma**_ (2015(2) KLT 516), within one month from the date of their respective requests. Sd/- **P.B.SURESH KUMAR JUDGE** rsr (true copy)