Asha P. Johnson v. Kerala University of Health Sciences & Others

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR** **MONDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY 2017/26TH POUSHA, 1938** **WP(C).No. 1285 of 2017 (I) ---------------------------** ## **PETITIONER:** **-----------** **ASHA .P. JOHNSON, AGED 24 YEARS, D/O. C.JOHNSON,** **M.PHARM PART-II (PHARMACEUTICS), COLLEGE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES, GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.** **(REG. NO.152760218 FOR M.PHARM PART-I (REGULAR)-PHARMACEUTICS EXAMINATION 2015).** **BY ADVS.SRI.LIJI.J.VADAKEDOM** **SMT.REXY ELIZABETH THOMAS SRI.RAJEEV JYOTHISH GEORGE SRI.TOM E. JACOB** **RESPONDENT(S):** **--------------** **1. THE KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, THRISSUR, KERALA, PIN-680596, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR** **2. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATION, KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, THRISSUR, KERALA, PIN-680596.** **3. THE BOARD OF ADJUDICATION OF STUDENTS GRIEVANCES, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, (PRO-VICE CHANCELLOR) KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, THRISSUR, KERALA, PIN-680596.** **4. THE PRINCIPAL, GOVT. MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001.** **R1 TO R3 BY SRI.P.SREEKUMAR, SC R4 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.M.MANOJ** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-01-2017 ALONG WITH WPC.1254/2017 & CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **mbr/** **WP(C).No. 1285 of 2017 (I) ---------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS: -----------------------** |**EXHIBIT P1:**|<br>**THE COPY OF THE EXAMINATION NOTIFICATION**| |---|---| ||**DATED 23.06.2016.**| |**EXHIBIT P2:**|<br>**THE COPY OF THE MARK LIST OF THE PETITIONER**| ||**M.PHARM PART-I (REGULAR) PHARMACEUTICS**| ||**EXAMINATIONS, 2015.**| |**EXHIBIT P3:**|<br>**THE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER**| ||**NO.KUHS/EX.III/24832/RTI/2016 DATED 22.12.2016**| ||**ISSUED BY THE STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION, KUHS TO**| ||**THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH THE DETAILED SCORE**| ||**SHEET OF THE PETITIONER.**| |**EXHIBIT P4:**|<br>**THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE COPY OF THE DECISION**| ||**OF THE ACADEMIC COUNCIL OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT**| ||**UNIVERSITY WITH RESPECT TO THE CALCULATION OF**| ||**FINAL MARKS TO THE STUDENTS WHO GOT MARKS IN**| ||**BETWEEN THE 45 TO 49.**| |**EXHIBIT P5:**|<br>**THE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 24.10.2016**| ||**(SPECIFYING THE NEW MODE OF CALCULATION OF**| ||**AVERAGE MARKS) ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.**| |**EXHIBIT P6:**|<br>**THE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 7.1.2017**| ||**SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD**| ||**RESPONDENT**| |**EXHIBIT P7:**|<br>**THE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 19.12.2016 OF**| ||**THE SUPPLEMENTARY EXAMINATION.**| |**RESPONDENT(S)'**|**EXHIBITS:**<br>**NIL**| |**-----------------------**|| ||**//TRUE COPY//**| **P.S. TO JUDGE** **mbr/** ## **P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J.** ## **---------------------------------------------------------** **W.P.(C) Nos.1285 of 2016** ## **and** **W.P.(C) Nos.10647, 31863, 31923, 32697, 32785 of 2017** **-------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 25[th] day of October, 2017** ## **JUDGMENT** 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 the Act and as such, they are unable to make use the ## **W.P.(C) No.1285/2016 & con.cases.** -2- 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 ## **W.P.(C) No.1285/2016 & con.cases.** -3- correction of the entry relating to their properties 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 ## **W.P.(C) No.1285/2016 & con.cases.** -4- 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 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 ## **W.P.(C) No.1285/2016 & con.cases.** **==> picture [15 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** 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 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 the 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 ## **W.P.(C) No.1285/2016 & con.cases.** **==> picture [15 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** 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 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 ## **W.P.(C) No.1285/2016 & con.cases.** -7- 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 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