Hafiz Hakkim vs The Revenue Divisional Officer ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 14091 Ker

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 14091 Ker
Judgement Date : 7 July, 2021

Kerala High Court

Hafiz Hakkim vs The Revenue Divisional Officer ... on 7 July, 2021

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
  WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 2021/16TH ASHADHA, 1943
                    WP(C) NO. 13300 OF 2019


PETITIONER:

         HAFIZ HAKKIM, S/O. ABDUL HAKKIM,
         AGED 28 YEARS, KODAPPILY HOUSE,
         KUTTIKKATUKARA P.O.,
         KADUNGALLUR VILLAGE, PARAVUR TALUK,
         ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

         BY ADV P.M.ZIRAJ


RESPONDENTS:

    1    THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER (R.D.O),
         FORTKOCHI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682 001.

    2    THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE
         ELOOR MUNICIPALITY REPRESENTED BY
         ITS CONVENER, AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
         KRISHI BHAVAN, ELOOR MUNICIPALITY,
         UDYOGAMANDAL P.O.,
         ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683 501.

    3    AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN,
         ELOOR MUNICIPALITY, UDYOGAMANDAL P.O.,
         ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683 501.

    4    THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
         KADUNGALLUR VILLAGE,
         ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-683 511.
 WP(C) No.13300/2019
                            :2 :


     5     THE STATE OF KERALA
           REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
           REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,
           GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

           BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.G.RANJITA
           BY ADV.SRI.K.S.ARUN KUMAR

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 07.07.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).13296/2019, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.13300/2019
                                   :3 :




                           JUDGMENT

~~~~~~~~~

Dated this the 7th day of July, 2021

The petitioner seeks to direct the 1 st respondent to

consider and dispose of Ext.P4 application under Clause 6 of

the Kerala Land Utilisation Order without insisting to produce

fresh application and without insisting to remit prescribed fee

as per Section 27A of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land

and Wetland Act, 2008.

2. The petitioner's case in brief, is as follows:

The petitioner owns 5.26 Ares of property

comprised in Survey No.3/7-3 and Survey No.4/1-3-4 of

Kadungallur Village, Paravur Taluk of Ernakulam District. The

property which was once paddy land, was converted much

prior to the enactment of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy

Land and Wetland Act, 2008. However, the description of the

land remained as "Nilam" in Revenue records and Basic Tax WP(C) No.13300/2019

3. The petitioner submitted Ext.P4 application dated

08.08.2017 to the 1st respondent under Clause 6 of the Kerala

Land Utilisation Order, 1967. Ext.P5 is the receipt in proof of

submission of Ext.P4, contends the petitioner. Ext.P4

application was not considered by the 1st respondent. When

the petitioner approached the 1st respondent, he was informed

that after introduction of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy

Land and Wetland (Amendment) Act, 2018, the petitioner has

to make fresh application under the provisions of the said Act.

The petitioner would state that applications submitted under

the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 prior to the

Amendment Act, 2018 would not come under the purview of

the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act,

2008. If the petitioner is forced to apply under the Act, 2008,

he will have to part with huge amount of money towards fees.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned Government Pleader representing the respondents. WP(C) No.13300/2019

5. The petitioner's case is that since he has applied

for permission to use the land for other purposes under the

Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967, the petitioner need not

apply afresh in view of amendments made to the Kerala

Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland (Amendment) Act,

2018. As the petitioner appears to have submitted Ext.P4

application under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967

which has not been disposed of so far, I do not deem it

necessary to make an adjudication in this writ petition. The

writ petition can be disposed of directing the 1 st respondent to

consider Ext.P4 Application and pass appropriate orders

thereon in accordance with law.

In the circumstances of the case, the writ petition is

disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass

orders on Ext.P4 application submitted by the petitioner within

two months, in accordance with law.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH, JUDGE

aks/14.08.2021 WP(C) No.13300/2019

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13300/2019

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 2.5.2019 ISSUED BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF DRAFT DATA BANK ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 25.9.2017 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 8.8.2017 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT ON 20.10.2017.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 20.10.2017 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF FIRST RESPONDENT REGARDING RECEIPT OF EXHIBIT P4.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 7.3.2019 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT DATED 14.2.2019 IN WPC NO.8612 OF 2018.

ncd