Kerala High Court
Rajeev vs State Of Kerala on 3 September, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 12TH BHADRA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 29234 OF 2009
PETITIONER:
RAJEEV VENMANASSERY SREEVALSAN,
AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.LATE SREEVALSAN, RESIDING AT 5/539,
VENMANASSERY, PUTHENVELIKKARA, ERNAKULAM.
BY ADVS.
SRI.A.JAYASANKAR
SRI.MANU GOVIND
SMT.B.MEERA
SRI.PRAMOD DAS LOHYA
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPT.OF REVENUE,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
ERNAKULAM, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD.
3 THE PUTHENVELIKKARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PUTHENVELIKKARA.
4 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KOCHI.
5 THE TAHSILDAR
N.PARUR, COURT COMPLEX, N.PARUR.
6 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
PUTHENVELIKKARA, PUTHENVELIKKARA.
7 THE AGRICULTURE OFFICER
KRISHI BHAVAN, PUTHENVELIKKARA.
8 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL),
ALUVA.
9 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
PUTHENVELIKKARA, PUTHENVELIKKARA.
WP(C) NO.29234/2009
2
10 SRI.JOSE S/O.PADAYATTY PAULO
PADAYATTY, PUTHENVELIKKARA, ERNAKULAM-683512.
11 SMT.SMITHA JOSEWO.JOSE
PADAYATTY, PUTHENVELIKKARA, ERNAKULAM-683512.
12 SRI.JOSHY KALLARAKKAL
KALLARAKKAL, PUTHENVELIKKARA, ERNAKULAM-683512.
13 SMT.ANNIE CHEMMASSERY
CHEMMASSERY, PUTHENVELIKKARA, ERNAKULAM-683512.
14 SMT.VINCY PARAKKAL
PARAKKAL HOUSE, PONNURUNNI, ERNAKULAM-683512.
15 SRI.VARGHESE PADAYATTY
PADAYATTY HOUSE, PUTHENVELIKKARA-683512.
16 SRI.SHAJU PADAYATTY
PADAYATTY HOUSE, PUTHENVELIKKARA-683512.
17 SRI.ANTU KUDEERIKKAL
KUDEERIKKAL,PUTHENVELIKKARA-683512.
18 SRI.TOMY KUDEERIKKAL
KUDEERIKKAL, PUTHENVELIKKARA-683512.
19 TOMY KAITHARAN
KAITHARAN HOUSE, PUTHENVELIKKARA-683512.
20 SMT.MERCY KAITHARAN, W/O.TOMY
KAITHARAN HOUSE, PUTHENVELIKKARA-683512.
21 SRI.DOMINI KAITHARAN
KAITHARAN, PUTHENVELIKKARA-683512.
22 SRI.SEBASTIAN
THEKKINETH, PUTHENVELIKKARA-683512.
23 SRI.MURALEEDHARAN
MANGATTU, MANGATTU HOUSE,ELOOR- 683 518
24 ADDL.R24. THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE
PUTHENVELIKKARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY
ITS CONVENOR.
WP(C) NO.29234/2009
3
(ADDL.R24 IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED
09.04.2021 IN WP(C)29234/2009)
BY ADVS.
SRI.ABRAHAM JOHN
SRI.T.C.GOVINDA SWAMY
SRI.V.K.GOPALAKRISHNAN
SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED
SRI.PAUL JOSE
SRI.P.N.RAMAKRISHNAN NAIR
SRI.G.SHYAM RAJ
SRI.P.VISWANATHAN
SRI.VIVEK VARGHESE P.J.
SRI.VARUGHESE M EASO
SMT. DEEPA NARAYANAN, SENIOR GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 03.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO.29234/2009
4
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
-------------------------------
W.P.(C)No.29234 of 2009
--------------------------------
Dated this the 3rd day of September 2021
JUDGMENT
The above Writ petition is filed with following
prayers:
"1) Issue a Writ in the nature of mandamus or
any other appropriate writ direction or order
commanding the respondents to initiate appropriate
action under Act 28 of 2008 for restoring the nature
of the paddy fields mentioned in Para 7-table;
2) Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari
or any other appropriate writ direction or order
cancelling the Building permit issued pursuant to
Exhibit P4 application.
3) Issue a writ order or direction in the
nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ
direction or order compelling the respondents to
initiate prosecution steps for filing paddy fields
mentioned in para 7 table above.
4) Issue such other order or direction, this
honourable court deems fit and proper in the facts
and circumstances of the case."
2. The petitioner is a resident of
Puthenvelikkara Grama Panchayath. According to him
indiscriminate filling of paddy field are allowed by
the authorities in violation of the provisions of
WP(C) NO.29234/2009
the Kerala Conservation of Paddy land and Wet land
Act, 2008(for short 'the Act 2008'). The case of
the petitioner is that the statutory authorities are
not taking action and it affect the ecology of the
area. It is also stated that there is shortage of
ground water also because of this illegal
activities.
3. When this matter came up for consideration,
the Government Pleader was directed to get
instructions whether the property mentioned in the
writ petition is included in the data bank as per
'the Act 2008'. The learned Government Pleader
after getting instructions submitted that the
property is included in the data bank because it is
a 'nilam nikathu boomi'(നനലല നനകതഭമന). One of the
contesting respondents submitted that they obtained
orders from the statutory authorities for conversion
and thereafter converted the property and there is
no violation from their part as alleged in the writ
petition. This submission was made by respondent
No.11. The learned counsel for the respondent
WP(C) NO.29234/2009
Nos.12, 13 and 14 submitted that they have already
transferred the property even prior to the filing of
the writ petition and they are not necessary party
in the writ petition.
4. I do not want to make any observation about
the merit of the case. If there is any violation of
the provisions of 'the Act 2008', the statutory
authority is bound to take appropriate action in
accordance to law. This should be taken only after
giving notice to the affected parties and after
conducting a hearing. The respondents and other
affected parties are free to produce documents to
show that there is no violation. After considering
all those documents and after giving them an
opportunity of hearing, the statutory authority will
consider the same in accordance to law.
Therefore, this writ petition is disposed in the
following manner:
i) The 4th respondent will look into the
allegations in the writ petition and issue notice to
the contesting respondents in this case, if the 4th
WP(C) NO.29234/2009
respondent found that there is any violation of the
provisions of 'the Act 2008'. If there is any other
person violated the provisions of 'the Act 2008',
notice will be issued to them also.
ii) The 4th respondent will give an
opportunity of hearing to the affected parties and
thereafter take a decision in the matter in
accordance to the provisions contained in 'the Act
2008'.
iii) The affected parties including the
contesting respondents are free to produce documents
and other evidence to show that there is no
violation of the provisions of 'the Act 2008'.
iv) The above exercise should be completed
by the 4th respondent as expeditiously as possible,
at any rate, within six months from the date of
receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
DM
WP(C) NO.29234/2009
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 29234/2009
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF COMPLAINT DT. 06.05.09 FROM
PETITIONER AND ORS TO RESPONDENTS 2,4 &
EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF ENCUMBRANCE CERTIFICATE DT.
22.05.09.
EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE THANDAPER REGISTER NO. 18121
OF PUTHENVELIKKARA VILLAGE.
EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT DT. 23.01.08
BY 3RD RESPONDENT TO 11TH RESPONDENT FOR
NEW BUILDING; ALONG WITH SUBSEQUENT
APPLICATION AND ENDORSEMENT.
EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 02.03.2009
FROM PETITIONER TO 6TH RESPONDENT VILLAGE
OFFICER.
EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF THE REPLY NO. 1734/2009 DATED
04.04.2009 FROM 6TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7 COPY OF COMPLAINT DT. 20.04.09 TO 5TH
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8 COPY OF COMPLAINT DT. 24.04.09 BEFORE THE
9TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P9 COPY OF COMPLAINT DT. 02.03.09. BEFORE
7TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P10 COPY OF LETTER DT. 03.08.09 FROM 7TH
RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT R11(A) A TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED NO.
182/1/2008 OF CHENNAMANGALAM SUB REGISTRY
IN FAVOUR OF THE RESPONDENT NO. 11 DATED
18.1.2008.
WP(C) NO.29234/2009
EXHIBIT R11(B) A TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED NO.
120/I/2008 OF CHENNAMANGALAM SUB REGISTRY
IN FAVOUR OF THE RESPONDENT NO. 23 DATED
14.1.2008.
EXHIBIT R11(C) A TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING TAX RECEIPT
ISSUED BY THE PUTHENVELIKARA GRAMA
PANCHAYATH FOR THE YEAR 2008-2009
EXHIBIT R11(D) A TRUE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PROPERTY OWNED
BY THE 11TH RESPONDENT SHOWING THE ONE
ROOM BUILDING, COCONUT TREES AND BANANA
PLANTS.
EXHIBIT R11(E) A TRUE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PROPERTY OWNED
BY THE 23RD RESPONDENT SHOWING THE
COCONUT TREES AND BANANA PLANTS.
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE
