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

Dipu Mathai Baby v. State of Kerala and Others

Case / Petition Number:WP(C).No. 35235 of 2017 (D)

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • P.B.SURESH KUMAR
Judgment Date
2017-11-13
Court Decision / Holding
Writ petitions disposed of directing the Local Level Monitoring Committees to consider and pass orders on applications for correction of the Data Bank after obtaining KSRSEC reports. If corrections are granted, petitioners may file under Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order for permission to use the properties for other purposes and, where applicable, obtain building permits or numbers from local authorities. These decisions to be made within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment; and, where permissions under Clause 6 are granted, related actions including fresh assessment under the Kerala Land Utilization Act may be pursued.
Final Disposition
Writ petitions disposed of with directions to Local Level Monitoring Committees to consider corrections of Data Bank after KSRSEC report; if allowed, permissions under Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order and issuance of building permits/numbers as applicable, with timelines as specified in the judgment.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Dipu Mathai Baby

Respondents

  • State of Kerala represented by Secretary to Government, Department of Agriculture, Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram
  • Local Level Monitoring Committee represented by its Convener, Agricultural Officer, Krishi Bhavan, Udayamperoor, Kochi, Kerala
  • Agricultural Field Officer Krishi Bhavan, Udayamperoor, Kochi, Kerala

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Sri Kandampully Rahul
  • • SMT.Raaga R.Ramalakshmi

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Government Pleader Sri K.J.ManuraJ

Case Synopsis & Summary

The petitioners in this batch challenge inclusion of their properties, originally paddy lands converted to garden lands long before the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008, in the Data Bank under the Act. They contend that such entries prevent the use of their land for other purposes, including construction, and hinder grant of building permits or assignment of building numbers. The petitions seek directions to Local Level Monitoring Committees to correct Data Bank entries and to rectify revenue records; some petitions also seek building permits, while others seek numbering of constructed buildings. The court notes that if properties were converted prior to the Act, the Act would not apply to them, a point derived from a Supreme Court decision cited as Revenue Divisional Officer v. Jalaja Dileep; however, the correctness of the pre-Act status is to be determined by LLMCs, who have authority to correct Data Bank mistakes. The court directs LLMCs to consider and pass orders on correction applications after obtaining reports from the Kerala State Remote Sensing and Environment Centre (KSRSEC) about the properties’ status at the time of Act’s commencement. If corrections are permitted, petitioners may apply under Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order for permission for other use, and, where applicable, building permits or numbers will be issued. The orders should be passed within three months.

Provisions of Law Cited

Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008Kerala Land Utilization OrderClause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization OrderCircular No.46848/P1/2016 dated 22.12.2016

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contend that their properties, converted from paddy lands to garden lands long before the 2008 Act, were mistakenly included in the Data Bank, restricting use of the land for construction, seeking correction of Data Bank entries and revenue records, and in some cases, building permits or numbers. They argue that if pre-Act conversions occurred, the Act should not apply to them; LLMCs have the authority to correct errors after obtaining KSRSEC reports, and, if allowed, they should be permitted to pursue permissions under Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents argue that corrections and status determinations must follow the LLMC process, with reliance on KSRSEC reports and applicable statutory procedures under the Act and KLUO. They emphasize adherence to circulars and the need for careful evaluation of pre-Act status, maintaining that corrections will be governed by official channels and subject to permissions under KLUO, where applicable.

Cited Precedents (3)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Revenue Divisional Officer v. Jalaja Dileep2015(1) KLT 984PositiveCited as authority for the proposition that pre-Act conversions fall outside the Act’s applicability.
Puthan Purakkal Joseph v. Sub Collector2015(3) KLT 182PositiveCited to support the procedure under Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order for permissions and the LLMCs’ role in corrections.
Kizhakkambalam Grama Panchayat v. Mariumma2015(2) KLT 516PositiveCited to justify eligibility to move authorities under KLUO and related procedures in the light of the decision.

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 Dipu Mathai Baby 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** **MONDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017/22ND KARTHIKA, 1939** ## **WP(C).No. 35235 of 2017 (D)** **----------------------------** **PETITIONER :** - **------------------** **DIPU MATHAI BABY AGED 49 YEARS, S/O.MATHAI BABY, RESIDING AT FLAT NO.B-12D, NAGARJUNA LAUREL, KAKKANAD-PALLIKARA ROAD, KAKKANAD, KOCHI-682030, KERALA.** ## **BY ADVS.SRI.KANDAMPULLY RAHUL SMT.RAAGA R.RAMALAKSHMI** **RESPONDENTS :** **-----------------------** **1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.** **2. LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER, AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN, UDAYAMPEROOR, KOCHI, KERALA-682307.** **3. AGRICULTURAL FIELD OFFICER KRISHI BHAVAN, UDAYAMPEROOR, KOCHI, KERALA-682307.** **BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.J.MANURAJ** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13-11-2017 ALONG WITH WPC 36254/2017 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **bp** ## **WP(C).No. 35235 of 2017 (D)** ## **---------------------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS** **-------------------------------------** **EXHIBIT P1: A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.5818/2007 SHOWING OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY BY THE PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P2: A TRUE COPY OF SALE DEED NO.976/2004 WHEREBY THE PREDECESSOR OF THE PETITIONER, MR.SUNNY PETER, OBTAINED THE PROPERTY.** - **EXHIBIT P3: A TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 09-10-2017 WITH RESPONDENT TO THE PROPERTY.** - **EXHIBIT P4: A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF DATA BANK REGISTER ISSUED BY THE AGRICULTURAL FIELD OFFICER SHOWING THE PETITIONER'S PROPERTIES.** - **EXHIBIT P5: THE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 23-10-2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER TOWARDS THE CORRECTION OF DATA BANK REGISTER.** **EXHIBIT P6: COPY OF THE APPLICATION DT 3/11/2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER TOWARDS THE CORRECTION OF DATA BANK REGISTER.** **RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :** **NIL.** ## **//TRUE COPY//** ## **P.A. TO JUDGE** ## **bp** ## **P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J.** **-------------------------------------------W.P.(C).Nos.35235, 36254, 36258, 36270, 36300, 36316, 36325 & 36326 of 2017** **------------------------------------------------------------** **Dated this the 13[th] day of November, 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 of the W.P.(c).No.35235 of 2017 & 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. The petitioners have preferred applications before the Local Level Monitoring Committees concerned for correction of the entries relating to their properties in the Data Banks 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 in the revenue records. Some of the petitioners, among others, W.P.(c).No.35235 of 2017 & con. cases : 3 : 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 would not apply to the properties of the petitioners, they are entitled to make use of the properties for other W.P.(c).No.35235 of 2017 & con. cases : 4 : 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)]. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the writ petitions are disposed of directing the Local Level Monitoring Committees concerned to consider and pass orders on the applications preferred by the petitioners for correction of the Data Bank, 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, W.P.(c).No.35235 of 2017 & con. cases : 5 : 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 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 W.P.(c).No.35235 of 2017 & con. cases : 6 : 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 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