Punarudharana Pulaya Samajam v. Revenue Divisional Officer/Sub Collector, Fort Kochi; K.V. Prasanth

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE** **MONDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/9TH CHAITHRA, 1937** ## **WP(C).No. 7001 of 2015 (A)** **--------------------------------------** **PETITIONER(S):** **-----------------------** **PUNARUDHARANA PULAYA SAMAJAM, REG.NO. ER 110/96, NAYARAMBALAM, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.** **BY ADVS.SRI.B.S.SWATHY KUMAR SRI.A.K.RAJESH** ## **RESPONDENT(S):** **-------------------------** ## **1. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER/SUB COLLECTOR, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, FORT KOCHI, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 037.** ## **2. K.V.PRASANTH,** **KODAVATHUMATHARA VEEDU, NAYARAMBALAM P.O., ERNAKULAM - 682 509.** **R1 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.ANITHA RAVINDRAN R2 BY ADV. SRI.SYAM J SAM** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **msv/** ## **WP(C).No. 7001 of 2015 (A)** ## **--------------------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS -------------------------------------** **EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. NBLM 10/14-15 DATED 24/06/2014 TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.** **EXT.P1(A): TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE BUILDING.** - **EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE CLEARANCE CERTIFICATE GRANTED BY THE KERALA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY DATED 03/01/2014.** - **EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 10/03/2014.** - **EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, NAYARAMBALAM DATED 02/04/2014.** - **EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE PROHIBITORY ORDER NO. K-2383/14 DATED 20/07/2014 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.** - **EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 19/09/2014.** - **EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. K1-2383/14/K.DIS. DATED 19/02/2015 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.** - **EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 12/02/2015 BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.** **RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:** **-----------------------------------------** ## **NIL** **//TRUE COPY//** ## **P.S.TO JUDGE** Ms **v/** **A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J * * * * * * * * * * * *** W.P.C.No.7001 of 2015 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 30[th] day of March 2015 ## **J U D G M E N T** Petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ext.P7, an order passed by the 1[st] respondent declining to permit the petitioner to proceed with the construction of a building in the property having an extent of 6.04 Ares comprised in Re-Sy.No.B.7-34/13. It is inter alia mentioned in Ext.P7 that as per Basic Tax Register Re-survey, in case of 21.70 Ares in Re-survey No.34/13 is classified as nilam. However, when the data bank was prepared, the aforesaid 6.04 ares owned by the Samajam is reported to have been used as Madal Kuzhi, (pit for decaying coconut husk to produce coir yarn) seven years ago and thereafter, it was filled up. Though it was argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is entitled to proceed with the construction, but the same came to be stopped on the basis of Ext.P5 order. The property is still lying as dry land and cannot be categorised as paddy land under the Kerala W.P.C.No.7001/2015 2 Conservation of Paddy and Wet Land Act, 2008. As far as the land is concerned, it was never cultivated with paddy at any point of time and even as per Ext.P7, the property was being used for other purposes. Petitioner had started construction of the building on the basis of a grant given by the District Panchayath. The building is constructed for Vocational Training Centre for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe community. Petitioner submits that on account of the orders passed, he is unable to complete the construction which will ultimately result in the lapse of funds. 2. But, having regard to the fact that the property is shown as 'nilam' in the basic tax register, as held by the Supreme Court in **R.D.O, Fort Kochi v. Jalaja Dileep** _[2015(1) KLT 984],_ if the property is shown as nilam in the revenue records, necessary corrections can be made only after permission is obtained in terms of Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967. 3. In view of the said judgment, even if the petitioner has already started construction, as long as the prohibitory 3 W.P.C.No.7001/2015 order has been issued and as per the entry in the BTR, the property remains as nilam, petitioner ought to have approached the District Collector by invoking Clause 6 of the KLU Order, 1967. 4. In the result, I do not find any infirmity in the order issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer in terms of Ext.P7. The remedy of the petitioner is to approach the District Collector by invoking Clause 6 of the KLU Order, 1967. When such an application is filed by the petitioner, the District Collector shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders, as expeditiously as possible. It is made clear that only after obtaining appropriate orders in this regard, further construction can be made by the petitioner in the said property. With the above observation, this writ petition is disposed of. (sd/-) **(A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE)** jsr W.P.C.No.7001/2015 4 W.P.C.No.7001/2015 5 W.P.C.No.7001/2015 6