Kerala High Court
Jackson Raphael K. M vs State Of Kerala on 3 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 14TH MAGHA,1942
WP(C).No.13582 OF 2020(W)
PETITIONER/S:
JACKSON RAPHAEL K. M.,
AGED 44 YEARS,
S/O. K.X. MATHEW,
KONOTH HOUSE,
MUNDAMVELI,
PALLURUTHY,
KOCHI - 682 507.
BY ADVS.
SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA
SMT.K.S.ARCHANA
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2 DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
ERNAKULAM, CIVIL STATION,
KAKKANAD, KOCHI - 682 030.
3 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
FIRST FLOOR, K. B. JACOB ROAD,
FORT KOCHI, KOCHI - 682 001.
W.P.(C) No.13582 of 2020 2
4 TAHSILDAR,
KOCHI TALUK,
FORT KOCHI, KOCHI - 682 001.
5 VILLAGE OFFICER
PALLURUTHY VILLAGE,
PALLURUTHY P. O.,
KOCHI - 682 006.
6 GREATER COCHIN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (GCDA),
KADAVANTHRA, ERNAKULAM,
KOCHI - 682 020,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
7 COCHIN CORPORATION,
KOCHI - 682 011,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
R6 BY ADV. SRI.JIMMY GEORGE
R7 BY SMT.SAREENA GEORGE, STANDING COUNSEL,
COCHIN CORPORATION
BY SRI.VIPIN P.VARGHESE, STANDING COUNSEL,
GCDA
BY SMT.G.RANJITA, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 03.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.13582 OF 2020
3
W.P.(C) No.13582 of 2020
-----------------------------------------------
JUDGMENT
Petitioner purchased an item of property measuring 2.60
Ares situated in Palluruthy Village, Ernakulam District in terms of Ext.P2
assignment deed. The petitioner proposes to put up a building in the said
land. He, therefore, preferred an application for building permit before
the seventh respondent, the Kochi Municipal Corporation (the
Corporation). It is stated by the petitioner that the application of the
petitioner for building permit is not being entertained by the Corporation
since the land of the petitioner is shown in the revenue records as
'Nilam'. It is also stated by the petitioner that the Corporation is taking
the stand that the petitioner has to change the classification of the land
as provided for under Sections 27A and 27C of the Kerala Conservation
of Paddy Land Wetland Act, 2008 (the Act) for the purpose of seeking
building permit in respect of the said land. The case of the petitioner is
that the land covered by Ext.P2 assignment deed is one allotted to the
vendor of the petitioner by the sixth respondent after acquiring the same
for residential purposes, in terms of a Town Planning Scheme framed
under the Town Planning Act 1108 and therefore, the provisions of the
Act cannot have any application to the said land. The petitioner,
therefore, seeks appropriate directions in this regard in the writ petition.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the
WP(C).No.13582 OF 2020
learned Government Pleader as also the leaned counsel for the
Corporation.
3. Ext.P1 is the title deed of the vendor of the petitioner in
Ext.P2 document. Ext.P1 indicates that the land covered by Ext.P2
assignment deed is one allotted to the vendor of the petitioner by the
sixth respondent for residential purposes after acquiring the same in
terms of a Town Planning Scheme framed under the Town Planning Act
1108. In State of Kerala and others v. Binu Mathew Chacko and
others, 2020 (6) KHC 717, a Division Bench of this court held that the
provisions of the Act will not have any application to the lands acquired,
developed and allotted for residential or other purposes by
Governmental agencies under development schemes framed under the
Town Planning legislation. It is also held by the Division Bench in the said
case that permission is deemed to have been granted for such lands
under the Kerala Land Utilization Order. In the light of the said decision of
the Division Bench, the Corporation cannot insist compliance of the
provisions of the Act for considering application for building permit in
such lands, even if the said lands are shown in the revenue records as
'Nilam'. In Iype Varghese v. Revenue Divisional Officer, 2020 (5)
KLT 403, this Court held that where statutory permission for change of
user of land is granted for conversion of a paddy land to a garden land,
then it is the obligation of the competent authority under the Land Tax
Act to make a fresh assessment of the land so as to collect the higher
land tax for such converted land and to issue appropriate directions to
the officers concerned to make additional entries in the Basic Tax
WP(C).No.13582 OF 2020
Register so as to reflect the nature of the land as garden land/Purayidam
in the said Register.
The writ petition, in the circumstances, is disposed of
directing the Corporation to grant the building permit applied for by the
petitioner, if the application is otherwise in order. This shall be done
within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It
is made clear that the petitioner would be free to prefer appropriate
application before the competent authority under the Kerala Land Tax
Act for re-assessment of the land. Needless to say that if the petitioner
prefers application for re-assessment under the Kerala Land Tax Act, the
land of the petitioners shall be re-assessed as dry land and appropriate
additional entries shall be made in the Basic Tax Register indicating the
present classification of the land.
Sd/-
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.
rkj
WP(C).No.13582 OF 2020
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.682/04 DATED
23.01.2004 OF THE SUB REGISTRY, KOCHI.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.2871/18
DATED 05.09.2018 OF THE SUB REGISTRY,
KOCHI.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 05.11.2018
ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT IN FAVOUR OF
THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
28.10.2019 IN W.P.(C) NO.24364/2019 OF
THIS HON'BLE COURT.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 1.7.2019
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER FOR PLACING
THE SAME IN THE ADALATH PROPOSED BY THE
HON'BLE MINISTER FOR LSGD ON 15.07.2019.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE
DECISION OF THE ADALATH HELD ON
16.07.2019 AT THE TOWN HALL, ERNAKULAM.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
29.08.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING NO.K-
1/4285/2019 DATED 02.11.2019 OF THE 3RD
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8 (a) TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT NO.198/19 DATED
02.11.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE 5TH
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
19.12.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
