Muhammed Haji vs The District Collector
2022 Latest Caselaw 6306 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
        FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 13TH JYAISHTA, 1944
                        WP(C) NO. 18073 OF 2022
PETITIONER

             MUHAMMED HAJI.,
             AGED 65 YEARS
             S/O. MOITHUNNI, CHEMMALA HOUSE, AMARAMBALAM P.O.,
             THONDIYIL, MALAPPURAM - 679 332.
             BY ADVS.
             RENI JAMES
             BINIYAMIN K.S.


RESPONDENTS:

    1        THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
             COLLECTORATE, UP HILL, MALAPPURAM - 676505.
    2        THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
             PERINTHALMANNA REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
             SHORNUR-PERINTHALMANNA ROAD, SHANTI NAGAR,
             PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM - 679322.
    3        THE TAHSILDAR,
             NILAMBUR TALUK OFFICE,
             KOZHIKODE-NILAMBUR-GUDALLUR ROAD, NILAMBUR,
             MALAPPURAM - 679329.
    4        THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
             KARULAI VILLAGE OFFICE, KARULAI, MALAPPURAM - 679330.
    5        THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
             KARULAI KRISHI BHAVAN, KARULAI, MALAPPURAM - 679331.


             SMT.SURYA BINOY B, SR.GP


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 18073 OF 2022
                               2

                          JUDGMENT

Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2022

The petitioner, who is owner in possession of 1 Hectare

45 Ares and 25 Square Metres of land in Karulai Village in

Nilambur Taluk of Malappuram District, has approached this

Court seeking to command the 2nd respondent to consider and

pass orders on Exts.P3 and P6 applications within a time

frame.

2. The petitioner states that he is holding 1 Hectare

45 Ares and 25 Square Metres of land in Karulai Village in

Nilambur Taluk. The petitioner states that out of the properties

held by the petitioner, 80.94 Ares of land comprised in Survey

No.250/7-3 and 5.66 Ares of land comprised in Survey

No.250/7-4 are described as 'Nilam' and rest of the properties

are mentioned as 'Purayidam' in Revenue records. The

petitioner's case is that his properties are lying as a converted WP(C) NO. 18073 OF 2022

land and is not suitable for paddy cultivation. Nevertheless, the

properties comprised in Survey Nos.250/7-3 and 250/7-4 are

included in Data Bank as paddy land. These properties are

described as 'Paddy Land' in Revenue records also.

3. In order to utilise the land for other purposes, the

petitioner submitted Ext.P6 application for removing the land

from the Data Bank. The petitioner also made Ext.P3

application to change the nature of the land in Revenue

records. The respondents are not acting on Exts.P3 and P6.

Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court.

4. The learned Government Pleader entered

appearance and resisted the writ petition. The Government

Pleader pointed out that in the sketch accompanying in Ext.P3

application, the "applying area" is shown as 36 Ares and 47

Square Metres only, whereas in the Form 7 application, the

area is shown as 40.48 Ares. Therefore, there is an obvious

anomaly in Ext.P3 application. The Government Pleader

further submitted that Ext.P3 application for change of nature WP(C) NO. 18073 OF 2022

of land can be considered only after the 2nd respondent takes

a decision on Ext.P6 application to remove the land from the

Data Bank. This Court finds that the anomalies in the extent of

land appearing in Form 7 application and the sketch

accompanying thereto, are matters to be considered by the 2 nd

respondent.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

and the learned Government Pleader representing the

respondents.

6. The petitioner is the owner of 1 Hectare 45 Ares

and 25 Square Metres of land in Karulai Village in Nilambur

Taluk. The petitioner's property is lying as a converted land

and is not suitable for paddy cultivation. In order to use the

land in a more profitable way, the petitioner has submitted

Ext.P6 application for removal of the land from Data Bank

and Ext.P3 application for change of nature of the land in

Revenue records.

WP(C) NO. 18073 OF 2022

7. Exts.P3 and P6 applications are submitted by the

petitioner invoking the provisions contained in the Kerala

Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 and the

Rules made thereunder. As the petitioner has invoked his

statutory remedies, the competent authority, namely the 2nd

respondent, is bound to consider the applications within a

reasonable time and take a decision thereon, in accordance

with law.

In the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of

directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P6 application

and take a decision thereon, within a period of three months

and thereafter to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3, within

a further period of two months.

sd/-

N.NAGARESH JUDGE hmh WP(C) NO. 18073 OF 2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18073/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 28.07.2020 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE DRAFT DATA BANK ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 7 APPLICATION DATED 08.09.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT ALONG WITH SURVEY SKETCH.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE CHALLAN EVIDENCING PAYMENT OF STATUTORY FEE DATED 26.08.2021.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE FORWARDING LETTER NO.

SR 1101/2021/M1 DATED 08.09.2021ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 5 APPLICATION DATED 13.04.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE PROOF EVIDENCING THE RECEIPT OF THE FORM 5 APPLICATION DATED 13.04.2022.