Kerala High Court
The Chairman vs State Of Kerala on 8 June, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 18TH JYAISHTA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 12016 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
THE CHAIRMAN,
THYKKATTU DEVASWOM TRUST, VENNALA P.O., KOCHI-
682028, REPRESENTED BY TGN KUMAR.
BY ADVS.
M.R.NANDAKUMAR
MAYIKA SUNDAR
P.S.BIJU
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THE DEPARTMENT OF
REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION ROAD, KAKKANAD,
KERALA-682030.
3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
EDAPPALLY SOUTH VILLAGE, EDAPPALLY, ERNAKULAM-
682025.
4 THE KERALA STATE REMOTE SENSING AND ENVIRONMENT
CENTRE,
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, 1ST FLOOR, VIKAS
BHAVAN, NEAR LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY, UNIVERSITY OF
KERALA SENATE HOUSE CAMPUS, PMG,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033.
5 THE PRINCIPAL AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
OFFICE F THE PRINCIPAL AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD-682030.
6 CORPORATION OF KOCHI,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PARK AVENUE ROAD,
MARINE DRIVE, KOCHI-682011.
-2-
W.P.(C). No. 12016 of 2021
7 THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER,
ELECTRICAL SECTION, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY
BOARD LIMITED, VENNALA-PALACHUVADU ROAD,
VENNALA, ERNAKUALM-682028.
8 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
JANAMYTHRI POLICE STATION, PALARIVATTOM, CIVIL
LINE ROAD, PALARIVATTOM, ERNAKULAM, KERALA-
682025.
9 K.T. ANTONY,
KOTTIYATH HOUSE, VENNALA P.O., KOCHI-682028.
10 JESSY ALEXANDER,
NETTAYIKODATH HOUSE, CHAKKARAPARAMBU, THAMMANAM
P.O., KOCHI-682032.
11 NARAYANAN,
KUZHAI PARAMBIL HOUSE, PIPELIN ROAD,
PALARIVATTOM P.O., KOCHI-682025.
BY ADVS.
SHRI.K.JANARDHANA SHENOY, SC, KOCHI MUNICIPAL
CORPORATION
K.RAJESH KANNAN
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.VISHNU.S FOR R4,
SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN, SR.GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 08.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
W.P.(C). No. 12016 of 2021
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
======================================================
W.P.(C) No.12016 of 2021
=============================================================
Dated this the 8th day of June, 2022
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed with following prayers:
"i) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any
other writ, order or direction directing the 2nd and 5th
respondents to initiate action for restoring the paddy
land comprised in Sy. No: 50/14 and 102/11 situated in
Vennala Kara, Edappally South Village, Kanayannur
Taluk, Ernakulam District, after conducting remote
sensing and preparation of satellite data information
and report by the 4th respondent.
ii) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other
writ, order or direction forbearing the 6th respondent
from renewing the application for renewal of licence in
shop rooms situated in Sy. No: 50/14 and 102/11
situated in Vennala Kara, Edappally South Village,
Kanayannur Taluk, Ernakulam District
iii) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other
writ, order or direction directing the 7th respondent to
disconnect the electricity connection granted to the
rooms situated in Sy. No: 50/14 and 102/11 situated in
Vennala Kara. Edappally South Village, Kanayannur
Taluk, Ernakulam District.
W.P.(C). No. 12016 of 2021
iv) Pass such further orders as this Hon'ble court may
be pleased to grant on the facts and circumstances of
the case."
2. The petitioner is the Chairman of Devaswom Trust.
It is the case of the petitioner that respondents 9 to 11 are
owners of paddy land, which is converted by filling of soil in
violation of the statutory provisions. It is also stated that they
have let out the buildings constructed illegally in the said land
to persons who are doing business in fruits, vegetables, fish and
meat. When the sale of meat and fish cause severe nuisance,
writ petitions were preferred, which culminated Ext.P1
judgment of this Court directing to close down the business in
the shop before consideration of application for renewal of
licence by the Corporation of Kochi. Since the business is
being conducted in the land which has been converted in
violation of Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland
Act, 2008 and the rules framed thereunder, the petitioner
approached the District Collector, who is the statutory authority
W.P.(C). No. 12016 of 2021
to initiate action for restoration of paddy land. Since, there is
no action, this writ petition is filed.
3. Heard the counsel for the petitioner, the learned
Government Pleader, the learned Standing Counsel appearing
for the 6th respondent Corporation, the counsel appearing for
respondents 9 to 11 and also the Standing Counsel appearing for
the 7th respondent.
4. The counsel for the petitioner reiterated his
contentions in the writ petition. On the other hand, the counsel
for the contesting respondents submitted that as per Ext.R9(c),
it is written as converted land. Therefore, the contention of the
petitioner is not correct. It is also stated by the contesting
respondents that two writ petitions are filed before this Court as
WP(C) No. 3200 of 2022 and 29676 of 2021 for consideration
of applications in Form 5 and Form-6 under the Kerala
Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act. It is also
W.P.(C). No. 12016 of 2021
submitted that there is a direction to consider those applications
by this Court. Now all the matters are pending before the
Revenue Divisional Officer.
5. This Court considered the contentions of the
petitioner and the respondents. The grievance of the petitioner
is narrated in Ext.P2. Ext.P2 is submitted before the 2 nd
respondent. I think there can be a direction to the 2 nd
respondent to consider Ext.P2 after giving notice to the
petitioner and other contesting respondents within a time frame.
The 2nd respondent will get a report from the Revenue
Divisional Officer also, before passing final orders in it.
Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of in the following
manner:
1. The 2nd respondent is directed to consider Ext.P2
and take appropriate steps in accordance to law, after
W.P.(C). No. 12016 of 2021
giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and
respondents 9 to 11.
2. Before taking a decision, the 2nd respondent or any
authorised officer will inspect the property in dispute.
3. The 2nd respondent will also call for a report from
the Revenue Divisional Officer, Fortkochi, before
proceeding further about the nature of the property
and the Revenue Divisional Officer is free to pass
appropriate orders, in accordance to the Kerala
Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act and
Rules.
4. The above exercise should be completed by the
2nd respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any
rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a
copy of this judgment.
sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
das
W.P.(C). No. 12016 of 2021
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12016/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WA
NO.736/2021 DATED 27/05/2021.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION PREFERRED BY
THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT
DATED 28/05/2021.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PICTURES TAKEN BY THE
MOBILE PHONE AND DOWNLOADED.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS
EXT.R9(A) TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED
NO.1056/1/1997 DATED 13.3.1997
EXT.R9(B) TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED
21.8.2017 ISSUED TO THE 9TH RESPONDENT
FROM EDAPPALLY VILLAGE OFFICE
EXT.R9(C) TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE
DATA BANK ENTRY WITH RESPECT TO MAY
PROPERTY
EXT.R9(D) TRUE COPY OF THE FORM NO.5 AS PROVIDED
IN RULE F(D) SUBMITTED BY ME BEFORE
THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KOCHI
DATED 16.09.2021.
