High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2017-11-08Disposed of

Parameswaran N. v. District Collector, Civil Station, Alappuzha; Village Officer, Thazhaakkara, Mavelikkara; Agricultural Officer, Thazhakkara Panchaayath; Chairman, Thazhakkara Panchaayath, Local Level Monitoring Committee (formed as per Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act 2008)

Case / Petition Number:WP(C).No. 31686 of 2016 (I)

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: P.B. Suresh Kumar
Judgment Date: 2017-11-08
Court Decision / Holding: Writ petitions disposed of with directions: The competent authority under the Kerala Land Utilization Order, 1967 is to decide the petitioners’ applications for permission to use their properties for other purposes in light of the decisions in Puthan Purakkal Joseph and Shivadasan, after obtaining reports from the Conveners of the Local Level Monitoring Committees. Conveners are to verify pre-Act conversions, gather particulars, and forward reports within specified timelines. If the petitioners are entitled, building permits or numbers shall be issued; fresh assessment under the Kerala Land Tax Act shall be considered where applicable. The LLMCs are empowered to call for necessary details, ensure properties are not liable to be included in Data Banks, and rectify Data Banks accordingly within a defined period.
Final Disposition: Disposed of

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Parameswaran N.

Respondents

District Collector, Civil Station, Alappuzha
Village Officer, Thazhaakkara, Mavelikkara
Agricultural Officer, Thazhakkara Grama Panchayath, Mavelikkara
Chairman, Thazhakkara Panchayath, Local Level Monitoring Committee, Mavelikkara

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Adv. A. Azhar

Counsels for Respondents

• Government Pleader Sri. Ravi Krishnan

Case Synopsis & Summary

These writ petitions challenge the operation of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 and the data banks created under it. The petitioners, described as originally paddy fields that had been converted to garden land before the Act, contend that revenue records still identify their properties as paddy land and that the Data Banks either exclude them or misclassify them. They seek permission under the Kerala Land Utilization Order, 1967 to use their lands for other purposes, including construction, and, in several petitions, correction of entries in revenue records or assignment of building numbers or issuance of building permits. The Government Pleader concedes that there are mistakes in the draft and final Data Banks; under the Act’s amendments, Local Level Monitoring Committees can make corrections. The court notes that if a property was converted prior to the Act, the provisions of the Act would not apply, and the petitioners would be entitled to seek permission under the Kerala Land Utilization Order after due process, citing Puthan Purakkal Joseph and Shivadasan. The court disposes the writ petitions by directing the competent authority under the KL Utilization Order to decide the applications in light of these decisions, after obtaining reports from LLMC conveners and VO officers, and to issue permits or building numbers if entitled, with subsequent tax considerations.

Provisions of Law Cited

Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland (Amendment) Rules, 2017Kerala Land Utilization Order, 1967Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization OrderKerala Land Tax Act

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners, being original paddy fields converted to garden land before the 2008 Act, contend that their properties are misclassified in revenue records and reflected in the Data Banks as paddy land. They seek permission under Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order, 1967 to use their lands for other purposes, including construction, and correction of revenue entries or issuance of building numbers. They argue that pre-Act conversions should exempt their properties from the Act’s reach and rely on decisions like Revenue Divisional Officer v. Jalaja Dileep and Shivadasan v. Revenue Divisional Officer to justify their right to seek permissions after due process and LLMC verification.

Contentions of Respondents

Respondents highlight that Data Banks contain mistakes and that amendments in 2017 empower Local Level Monitoring Committees to rectify such entries. They contend that, before granting permission, it must be verified whether the land is subject to the Data Bank and whether it is exempt from the Act due to pre-Act conversion. They urge careful compliance with the KL Utilization Order, including reports from LLMC conveners and village officers, and argue that the court should ensure that properties are appropriately treated under the Act or the Order, with corrections where warranted.

Cited Precedents (4)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Revenue Divisional Officer v. Jalaja Dileep	2015(1) KLT 984	Positive	Cited as a controlling authority to hold that pre-Act conversions may exempt properties from the Act’s application, allowing permission under the KL Utilization Order after due process.
Puthan Purakkal Joseph v. Collector	2015(3) KLT 182	Positive	Used to define the scope and exercise of power under the Kerala Land Utilization Order in dealing with applications for change of land use.
Shivadasan v. Revenue Divisional Officer	2017(3) KLT 822	Positive	Cited to support interpretation of the KL Utilization Order’s scope in permitting use changes.
Kizhakkambalam Grama Panchayat v. Mariumma	2015(2) KLT 516	Positive	Referenced for its relevance to the law’s interpretation and the protection of rights in pre-Act contexts.

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 Parameswaran N. v. District Collector, Civil Station, Alappuzha; Village Officer, Thazhaakkara, Mavelikkara; Agricultural Officer, Thazhakkara Panchaayath; Chairman, Thazhakkara Panchaayath, Local Level Monitoring Committee (formed as per Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act 2008) 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** **WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017/17TH KARTHIKA, 1939** ## **WP(C).No. 31686 of 2016 (I)** **----------------------------------------** **PETITIONER(S) :** **--------------------------** **PARAMESWARAN.N, R/AT PRASANTH MALLASSERIL, THAZHAKKARA P.O., MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.** **BY ADV. SRI.A.AHZAR** **RESPONDENT(S) :** - **----------------------------** **1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, ALAPPUZHA-690 101.** **2. VILLAGE OFFICER, THAZHAKKARA, MAVELIKKARA-690 102.** **3. AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, THAZHAKKARA PANCHAYATH, MAVELIKKARA-690 102.** **4. CHAIRMAN, THAZHAKKARA PANCHAYATH, LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE, (FORMED AS PER KERALA CONSERVATION OF PADDY LAND AND WETLAND ACT-2008) MAVELIKKARA-690 102.** **BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.RAVI KRISHNAN** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08-11-2017, ALONG WITH W.P(C).NO. 33436 OF 2016 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **Msd.** **WP(C).No. 31686 of 2016 (I)** ## **----------------------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT.** **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.** **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGE.** **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE FROM THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, THAZHAKKARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH.** **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE CHALLAN.** **RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :** ## **NIL** **//TRUE COPY//** **P.A.TO JUDGE.** **Msd.** ## **P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J.** **--------------------------------------------** **W.P.(C).Nos.31686 & 33436 of 2016 and** **W.P.(C) Nos.1697, 1916, 3280, 3606, 4109, 4331, 4332, 4539, 4763, 4984, 5015, 5037, 5246, 6017, 6329, 6335, 7121, 7344, 7345, 7399, 7401, 7436, 7530, 7566, 8432, 8750, 9132, 9265, 9276, 9511, 9860, 10085, 10100, 10170, 10185, 10268, 10407, 10522, 10635, 10672, 10947,11055, 11098, 11559, 11692, 11971, 12127, 12128, 12155, 12288, 12452, 12955, 13119, 13268, 13295, 13512, 13564, 13669, 13755, 13801, 13925, 14785, 17248, 17744, 18430, 18460, 23030, 23340, 25034, 25035, 27501, 31811 & 33252 of 2017** **---------------------------------------------------------------** **Dated this the 8[th] day of November, 2017** ## **J U D G M E N T** The properties of the petitioners referred to in the writ petitions were though paddy fields originally, it is W.P.(c).No.31686 of 2016 & con. cases : 2 : stated that the same have been converted as garden lands prior to the introduction of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 ('the Act'). The case of the petitioners in the writ petitions is that since their properties are described as paddy land in the revenue records, they are unable to make use of the same for other purposes including construction of buildings. It is alleged in some of the writ petitions that the applications preferred by the petitioners therein for building permits 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. In most of the writ petitions, the specific case of the petitioners is that their properties are shown as converted prior to the coming into force of the Act in the Data Banks prepared under the Act. In the remaining writ petitions, the case of the petitioners is that their properties are not shown as paddy land in the Data Banks. The petitioners, therefore, preferred applications before the competent authority under W.P.(c).No.31686 of 2016 & con. cases : 3 : the Kerala Land Utilization Order, 1967 seeking permission to use the properties for other purposes including construction of buildings. The applications preferred by the petitioners in this connection are part of the records. The petitioners seek directions in these writ petitions to the competent authority under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order to grant permission sought for by them to make use of the properties for other purposes. In some of the writ petitions, the petitioners seek orders for correction of the entry relating to their properties in the revenue records also. 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. The learned Government Pleader submits that W.P.(c).No.31686 of 2016 & con. cases : 4 : there are mistakes in the draft and final Data Banks published under the Act and by virtue of the provisions contained in the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland (Amendment) Rules, 2017, the Local Level Monitoring Committees are authorised to carry out appropriate corrections in the Data Banks. According to the learned Government Pleader, before granting the permission sought for by the petitioners, it has to be ensured that the properties involved in these matters are not properties which are liable to be included in the Data Banks. 4. 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). If the provisions of the Act would not apply to the properties of the petitioners, they are entitled to make use of the same for other purposes, after obtaining permission of the competent authority under Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order [See **Puthan Purakkal Joseph** v. **Sub** W.P.(c).No.31686 of 2016 & con. cases : 5 : **Collector** (2015(3) KLT 182)]. In **Puthan Purakkal Joseph** _(supra) and_ **Shivadasan v. Revenue Divisional Officer** (2017(3) KLT 822), this Court has dealt with the scope of the power of the competent authority under the Kerala Land Utilization Order in dealing with the applications for permission preferred for use of the properties for other purposes. In the circumstances, the writ petitions are disposed of directing the competent authority under the Kerala Land Utilization Order to pass orders on the applications preferred by the petitioners for permission to use their properties for other purposes in the light of the decisions of this Court in **Puthan Purakkal Joseph** _(supra)_ and **Shivadasan** _(supra_ ), after obtaining reports from the Conveners of the Local Level Monitoring Committees concerned to the effect that the properties involved in these matters are converted prior to the coming into force of the Act and hence, not liable to be included in the Data Bank. It is also directed that before forwarding the reports, the W.P.(c).No.31686 of 2016 & con. cases : 6 : Conveners of the Local Level Monitoring Committees shall, along with the Village Officers concerned, inspect the property with notice to the petitioners to satisfy the claim of the petitioners that the properties are not liable to be included in the Data Bank. For the said purpose, the Conveners of the Local Level Monitoring Committees are free to call for the particulars of the properties from the petitioners including copies of the title deeds. The reports shall be called for by the competent authority under the Land Utilization Order from the Conveners of the Local Level Monitoring Committees within a week from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment and the same shall be forwarded by the Conveners of the Local Level Monitoring Committees within one month thereafter. Orders as directed above shall be passed by the competent authority under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, within one month from the date of receipt of the reports. 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.31686 of 2016 & con. cases : 7 : 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 cases where they are parties to the writ petitions, 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