Kerala High Court
Dr.P.S. George vs State Of Kerala on 7 July, 2022
W.P.(C)No.7273/2017 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI
THURSDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 16TH ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 7273 OF 2017
PETITIONER:
DR.P.S. GEORGE
AGED 55 YEARS
S/O.SAMUEL, AGED 55 YEARS, PEEDIKAYIL HOUSE,
INDUSTRIAL ESTATE NAGAR P.O., CHETHIPUZHA VILLAGE,
CHANGANACHERRY TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT
BY ADVS.
SRI ALEX.M.SCARIA
SRI BOBBY JOSE
MS.SARITHA THOMAS
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVT. SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001
2 THE CONVENER
LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE,
CHANGANACHERRY-686 102
3 AGRICULTURE FIELD OFFICER
KRISHI BHAVAN, CHANGANACHERRY,
VAZHAPPALLY WEST-686103
4 CHAIRPERSON
CHANGANACHERRY MUNICIPALITY,
CHANGANACHERRY-686102
5 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
KOTTAYAM, OFFICE OF THE RDO,
COLLECTORATE, KOTTAYAM-686001
6 VILLAGE OFFICER
VAZHAPPALLY EAST VILLAGE-686103
BY ADVS.
SRI B.S.SYAMANTHAK, GOVT.PLEADER
SRI.M.P.ASHOK KUMAR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
18.03.2022, THE COURT ON 7.7.2022 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C)No.7273/2017 2
T.R. RAVI, J.
--------------------------------------------
W.P.(C)No.7273 of 2017
--------------------------------------------
Dated this the 7th day of July, 2022
JUDGMENT
The petitioner owns properties in Re-Sy.Nos.7/1/2/2, 8/3,
15/1-3, 15/1/1/1, 15/1/2/1, 20/2, 10/2, 9/3 and 10/11 of
Vazhappally East Village. On 17.2.2005, he applied before the 5th
respondent seeking permission to reclaim the land under the
Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 (KLU Order for short). The 5th
respondent issued order No.P/1511/2003 dated 27.2.2006
granting permission. Ext.P1 is the copy of the order. According to
the petitioner, the property was reclaimed before the
commencement of Act 28 of 2008. The petitioner applied on
3.4.2013 to the Tahsildar, Changanassery seeking to alter the
description of the land as Nilam in the Basic Tax Register. When
no steps were taken, he approached this Court by filing W.P.
(C)No.21964 of 2014 which was disposed of by Ext.P2 judgment
directing the petitioner to approach the Local Level Monitoring
Committee (LLMC) to correct the details of properties and after
getting the entry corrected, to approach the District Collector
under Clause 6 of the KLU Order for utilising the land for other
purposes. The petitioner applied to the LLMC. The LLMC met on
30.3.2015 and considered the petitioner's application. The
petitioner was not heard by the LLMC, nor was the decision of the
Committee communicated to the petitioner for almost a year. It is
only after the petitioner applied on 27.1.2016 under the Right to
Information Act that he was issued with a copy of the minutes of
the meeting of the LLMC, which has been produced as Ext.P3. It
can be seen from Ext.P3 that the view of the LLMS was that in the
light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, there is no
necessity to consider the request of the petitioner to remove the
property from the data bank. The order does not consider the
issue on merits. It would appear that the judgment referred to in
Ext.P3 is the judgment in RDO, Fortkochi v. Jalaja Dileep
reported in [2015 (1) KLT 984 (SC)]. The petitioner applied to
the LLMC to review their decision. It is when no decision was
taken on the said application which has been produced as Ext.P4,
that the petitioner has approached this Court seeking to quash
Ext.P3 and for a direction to respondents 2 to 4 to consider the
petitioner's application for correcting the details in the data bank.
The petitioner has thereafter filed I.A.No.1 of 2021 producing
Exts.P5 to P10 as additional documents. Ext.P6 is the certificate
issued by the 3rd respondent on 12.5.2015 stating that the
property has been converted prior to the 2008 Act and that for
more than 15 years no agricultural activities are being carried on
in the adjoining properties also. It is also stated in the report that
a hotel and Changanassery Club are located adjoining the
properties and the property is on the side of the Changanassery-
Palapra Bypass Road. Ext.P8 is the application submitted on
29.7.2016 to remove the properties from the data bank. Ext.P10
is the report of the Kerala State Remote Sensing and Environment
Centre (KSREC). The report would show that the properties were
lying either as fallow land or with buildings and structures and
scattered trees and plantations even prior to 2008.
2. On directions issued by this Court, the Government Pleader
has produced the proceedings of the LLMC dated 10.1.2022. What is
stated in the report is that the properties in all the survey numbers
together form a large extent of land and if the land is filled up, it can
cause flooding in the nearby properties. The report does not say that
any portion of the property is paddy land, so as to justify inclusion in the
data bank.
3. The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit producing
photographs to show the lie of the property and the fact that the
property can never be stated to be a paddy land.
4. Heard Sri Alex M.Scaria, the learned counsel for the
petitioner, Sri B.S.Syamanthak, the learned Government Pleader for
respondents 1, 3, 5 and 6 and Sri M.P.Ashok Kumar, for the 4 th
respondent.
5. At the time of admission, this Court on 3.3.2017, directed
the petitioner to produce a copy of the writ petition before the
Agricultural Officer along with a copy of the Field Measurement Book and
survey and subdivision numbers with respect to the property obtained
from the concerned Village Officer and directed the Agricultural Officer
to seek a report from the KSREC. After obtaining the report, the
Agricultural Officer was directed in his capacity as Convener of the LLMC
to cause a physical inspection of the property and submit a report before
this Court as to the lie and nature of the property. The report of the
LLMC produced along with the memo is consequent to the above
directions.
6. Going through the report of the LLMC, the KSREC and that of
the Agricultural Officer, it is evident that the properties cannot be
treated as paddy land justifying inclusion in the data bank. The only
reason stated in Ext.P3 is the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court has not prohibited orders being passed in
accordance with the 2008 Act regarding inclusion or exclusion from the
data bank. The reasoning in Ext.P3 is hence not relevant to the issue on
hand. The petitioner is hence entitled to succeed in this writ petition.
7. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. Ext.P3 is quashed.
It is declared that the properties belonging to the petitioner comprised
in Re-Sy.Nos.7/1/2/2, 8/3, 15/1-3, 15/1/1/1, 15/1/2/1, 20/2, 10/2, 9/3
and 10/11 of Vazhappally East Village are not liable to be included in
the data bank. Respondents 2 to 4 shall make necessary
corrections in the data bank in the light of the above declaration.
Respondents 5 and 6 shall also make necessary corrections in the
revenue records after orders are issued in terms of the directions
contained above, by the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent shall
issue necessary orders within one month from the date of receipt
of a copy of this judgment and respondents 5 and 6 shall issue
necessary orders within three weeks of receipt of a copy of the
order of the 2nd respondent.
Sd/-
T.R. RAVI
JUDGE
dsn
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7273/2017
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27.2.2006 ISSUED
BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT DATED 31.10.2014 IN WP(C)NO.21964/2014
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF
THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE,
CHANGANACHERRY DATED 30.3.2015
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER ON 12.1.2016 BEFORE THE LOCAL
LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PROOF OF PAYMENT OF FEE,
DT.20.3.2017
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE DT.12.5.2015 ISSUED
BY THE AGRICULTURAL OFRFICER, CHANGNASSERY
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPIES OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATES
DT.12.12.2004 AND 13.12.2006 ISSUED BY THE
VILLAGE OFFICER, VAZHAPPALLY.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DT.29.7.2016 ISSUED
BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGES IN RESPECT OF THE
LAND IN THE REPORT
EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF REPORT ON LAND USED CHANGE
BEARING NO.A 172/2015/KSREC/605177/21
Exhibit P11 TRUE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE GARDEN LAND BELONGS
TO THE PETITIONER
