Tomy P. Chacko Alias Tomy Chacko vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 23722 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. 27054 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

              TOMY P. CHACKO, ALIAS TOMY CHACKO
              AGED 62 YEARS
              PICHEMKALATHIL HOUSE, PULINCUNNU P.O.,
              ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT 2221,
              KIMBERLY DRIVE, GARLAND, TEXAS, 75040, USA
              REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY CHACKO JOSEPH,
              PICHEMKALATHIL HOUSE, PULINCUNNU P.O., ALAPUZHA DISTRICT.
              BY ADVS.
              RAJU K.MATHEWS
              CYRIL C. GEORGE
RESPONDENTS:

     1        STATE OF KERALA
              REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
              SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
     2        REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
              O/O.REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, FORT KOCHI-682001.
     3        TAHSILDAR,
              KANAYANNUR TALUK OFFICE, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-682011.
     4        VILLAGE OFFICER
              VILLAGE OFFICE, EDAPPILLY SOUTH VILLAGE,
              PALARIVATTOM P.O., COCHIN-682025.
              SRI.RIYAL DEVASSY, GP
     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. 27054 OF 2021

                                      2


                                JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P4 order of the 2nd

respondent as also seeking a declaration that Ext.P3 application in Form

6 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 the Circular dated

23.07.2021 which stood in the way of a consideration of applications in

the nature of Ext.P3 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 2.88 Ares and

since the Circular dated 23.07.2021 stands set aside, the application is WP(C) NO. 27054 OF 2021

liable to be considered in the light of the Government Order dated

25.02.2021 and the amended provisions of the Kerala Conservation of

Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008. The demand of fees by Ext.P4 is

therefore unsustainable.

In the result, Ext.P4 is set aside. There will be a direction to the 2 nd

respondent to take up Ext.P3 application and to consider and pass orders

on the same, in accordance with law, taking note of the Government

Order dated 25.02.2021 and the amended provisions of the Kerala

Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act and Rules, without

reference to the circular which stands set aside, 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 NP WP(C) NO. 27054 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 27054/2021

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED 05.11.2005.

Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT EVIDENCING PAYMENT OF LAND TAX.

Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 06.10.2020 SUBMITTED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.K2-5111/20 DATED 03.11.2021 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL