Raju K.R vs 1. State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 23628 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
   TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 9TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943
                        WP(C) NO. 26930 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          RAJU K.R
          AGED 64 YEARS
          KURUPAPARAMBATHU, OMKARAM, PUNKUNNAM, THRISSUR-680002.
          THRISSUR, PIN - 680002

          BY ADVS.
          M.R.HARIRAJ
          GISHA G. RAJ
          REJIVUE K.C.
          ALINA ANNA KOSE



RESPONDENTS:

    1     STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,
          REVENUE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695036
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695036

    2     REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
          REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, THRISSUR - 680003
          THRISSUR, PIN - 680003

    3     VILLAGE OFFICER
          OLLOOKKARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR-680655
          THRISSUR, PIN - 680655



          RIYAL DEVASSY-GOVERNMENT PLEADER




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
30.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 26930 OF 2021

                                2

                         JUDGMENT

Dated this the 30th day of November 2021

This writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P1 notice

issued by the 2nd respondent as also seeking a declaration

that the application in Form 6 submitted by the petitioner

under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland

Act, 2008 is liable to be considered without collecting any

fees in view of the fact that the amendment carried out to

the Act, the Rules and the Schedule would enable the

application for such conversion to be considered without

fees, where the extent of the property is 25 cents or less.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Exhibit

P3 circular which stood in the way of a consideration of

applications without insisting on payment of fees stands set

aside by a Division Bench of this Court in Baby v. District

Collector [2021 (6) KLT 316].

2. Having heard the learned Government Pleader

also, I notice that the extent of the property sought to be

converted is only 22.69 cents (9.19 Ares) and therefore

since Ext.P3 circular stands set aside, the application is WP(C) NO. 26930 OF 2021

liable to be considered in the light of Ext.P2 order and

the amended provisions of the Kerala Conservation of

Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008. The demand of fees

by Ext.P1 notice is therefore unsustainable.

In the result, Ext.P1 notice is set aside. There will

be a direction to the 2nd respondent to take up the

application in Form 6 dated 01.02.2019, submitted by

the petitioner before the 2nd respondent and consider

and pass orders on the same, in accordance with law,

taking note of Ext.P2 order and the amended provisions

of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland

Act and Rules, without reference to Exhibit P3 circular,

within a period of two months from the date of receipt of

a copy of this judgment.

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE SSK/30/11 WP(C) NO. 26930 OF 2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO-D1-7269/2019 DATED 30/12/2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE GO(RT) NUMBER 1166/2021/REV DATED 25/02/2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.

REV.P1/117/2021-REV DATED 23.07.2021.

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:            NIL



 SSK                           //TRUE COPY//          PA TO JUDGE