Kerala High Court
Jaicky A.R vs The Revenue Divisional Officer, ... on 9 June, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 19TH JYAISHTA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 18249 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
JAICKY A.R
AGED 56 YEARS
S/O. RAPPAI, AMBAZHAKKADAN HOUSE, MARATHAKKARA
POST,
THRIKKUR VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR
DISTRICT., PIN - 680306
BY ADVS.
K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR
MUHAMMED ASHIQUE
P.K.MINIMOLE
G.MOTILAL
RESPONDENTS
1 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, IRINJALAKUDA
CIVIL STATION ANNEXE, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR
DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 680125
2 THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE, THRIKKUR
REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENOR- THE AGRICULTURAL
OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN, THRIKKUR, THRISSUR
DISTRICT, PIN - 680306
3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, THRIKKUR VILLAGE
MARATHAKKARA POST, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR
DISTRICT., PIN - 680306
OTHER PRESENT:
SMT.SURYA BINOY B SR.GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 09.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.18249 of 2022 :2:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 9th day of June, 2022
The petitioner, who is owner in possession of 0.4047
hectares of land in Thrikkur Village of Mukundapuram Taluk
in Thrissur District, has approached this Court seeking to
direct the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on
Exts.P3 and P4 applications in the light of Ext.P6 report,
Ext.P7 Mahazar and Ext.P8 satellite data and report,
expeditiously without further delay.
2. The petitioner states that he owns 0.4047 hectares
of land, comprised in Survey No.172 of Thrikkur Village of
Mukundapuram Taluk in Thrissur District. The petitioner has
been paying land tax for the said property since execution of
Ext.P1 sale deed. According to the petitioner, the land is a
garden land with 30 yielding coconut trees aged more than
15 years. There are trees of other breeds also. The land is
surrounded by a road in north and garden land on all other
sides. However, the land is described as a paddy land in
Revenue records. The petitioner was informed that the land
is included in Data Bank also.
3. As the petitioner wanted to use the land for other
purposes, the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 application in
Form-5 of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and
Wetland Rules, 2008 seeking to remove the land from Data
Bank. The petitioner also submitted Ext.P4 application in
Form-7 seeking to change the nature of the land in Revenue
records. The petitioner states that these applications were
made as early in the month of February/March, 2020 and the
respondents have not acted expeditiously in the matter. The
Village Officer has submitted a report and a report of the
KSREC is also available. In the circumstances of the case,
there is no difficulty for the 1 st respondent to pass orders on
the applications submitted by the petitioner.
4. The Government Pleader entered appearance on
behalf of respondents 1 to 3 and opposed the writ petition.
The Government Pleader controverted all material
allegations made by the petitioner in the writ petition. The
Government Pleader pointed out that the petitioner has
submitted application for changing the nature only in respect
of a part of the land possessed by him. Therefore, a sketch
may be required to decide the matter. It is not clear whether
the petitioner had already submitted a sketch. The
Government Pleader submitted that since Exts.P3 and P4
have been filed invoking the Kerala Conservation of Paddy
Land and Wetland Rules, 2008, the same can be
considered, provided that the applications are duly made
supported with all necessary documents.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner
and the learned Government Pleader representing the
respondents.
6. The petitioner has submitted Ext.P3 application
invoking Rule 4(d) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy
Land and Wetland Rules, 2008 seeking to remove the land
from Data Bank. Ext.P4 application in Form-7 has been filed
invoking Rule 12(1) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy
Land and Wetland Rules, 2008 for changing the nature of
land in Revenue records. Ext.P6 Report of the Village Officer
indicates that the land in question is not included in Data
Bank. The petitioner has obtained Ext.P8 KSREC report also.
If the land is not included in Data Bank, Ext.P3 application
may not be a pre-requisite for consideration of Ext.P4.
However, this is for the 1st respondent to consider while
considering Exts.P3 and P4 applications.
7. The petitioner has submitted the applications
invoking statutory remedies available under the Kerala
Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008. The
applications being statutory nature, will have to be
considered and a decision has to be taken within a
reasonable time.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ
petition is disposed of directing the 1 st respondent to consider
Exts.P3 and P4 applications, if those are received supported
by all requisite documents and paying the prescribed fee and
to pass orders thereon, in accordance with law, within a
period of three months.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH, JUDGE
smm/ 13.06.2022
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18249/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF SALE DEED NO.7308/08
DATED 26.12.2008 OF SRO NELLAYI
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT OF
THE PROPERTY COVERED IN EXT P1 FOR THE
YEAR 2021 DATED 10.01.2021 ISSUED BY
THE 3RD RESPONDENT VILLAGE OFFICER,
THRIKKUR
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
06.03.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN FORM NO.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 7 DATED
10.02.2022 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST
RESPONDENT RDO
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE SAID CHALLAN DATED
10.02.2020
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE SAID REPORT DATED
23.02.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE MAHAZAR DATED NIL OF
THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE KSRSEC REPORT ALONG
WITH THE SKETCH DATED 13.01.2022
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
FIRST RESPONDENT
