Suroj P. Jacob vs State Of Kerala
2023 Latest Caselaw 647 Ker

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
 THURSDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 22ND POUSHA, 1944
                    WP(C) NO. 27578 OF 2022
PETITIONER:

         SUROJ P. JACOB
         AGED 59 YEARS
         S/O KURUVILLA CHACKO, RESIDING AT
         KIZHAKKEPARAMBIL HOUSE,
         NIRANAM KIZHAKKUM BHAGOM, THIRUVALLA TALUK,
         PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN- 689 621.

         BY ADV K.N.RADHAKRISHNAN(THIRUVALLA)


RESPONDENTS:

    1    STATE OF KERALA
         REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO THE LOCAL SELF
         GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
         THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.
    2    THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
         COLLECTORATE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT,
         PIN-689645.
    3    REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
         THIRUVALLA, THIRUVALLA P.O.,
         PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN- 689101.
    4    THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE,
         NEDUMPRUM GRAMA PANCHAYAT,
         REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER, NEDUMPURAM P.O.,
         PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN -689110.

         SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN SR GP

     THIS WRIT PETITION       (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP     FOR
ADMISSION ON 12.01.2023,      THE COURT ON THE SAME      DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.27578 of 2022



                               2




                           JUDGMENT

Dated this the 12th day of January, 2023

The petitioner is owner in occupation of 10.30 Ares of

land in Re-Survey No.442/14 and 1 Hectare and 32.20 Ares of

land in Re-Survey No.44/8 of Nudupram Village.

2. The petitioner filed an application under section

27A of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland

Act, 2008 to change the nature of the land in Revenue records

in order to utilise the land for other purposes. The 3rd

respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer allowed the said

application and directed the petitioner to remit fee on the basis

of Fair Value of adjacent wetland, which is valued at

₹88,000/-. The adjacent dry land having road access has a

Fair Value of ₹33,000/- while the adjacent wetland is valued WP(C) No.27578 of 2022

at ₹88,000/-.

3. The petitioner contends that as per amended

Section 2(vi)(A) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land

and Wetland Act, 2008, the Fair value means Fair Value of

the similarly situated dry land. If so, the Fair Value shall be

based on the dry land, which is valued at ₹33,000/-. Even

though the petitioner replied to the impugned order, no action

was taken by the competent authority. Hence, Ext.P3 order

issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer is liable to be

quashed, contends the petitioner.

4. The contention of the petitioner is that the Fair

Value has been fixed in an erroneous way in Ext.P4. For

residential plots with Corporation/Municipal/Panchayat road

access, the Fair Value has been fixed as ₹33,000/- whereas,

for wetland a much higher Fair Value of ₹88,000/- has been

fixed. This is thoroughly arbitrary and must be as a result of

some error. This is a matter to be considered by the WP(C) No.27578 of 2022

2nd respondent-District Collector, who is the competent

authority. The petitioner has preferred Ext.P6 representation

before the District Collector in this regard. If a proper decision

is taken on Ext.P6 representation, the burden of the petitioner

in the matter of payment of fee will be reduced considerably,

contends the petitioner.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

and the learned Senior Government Pleader representing the

respondents.

6. Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner

has projected a grievance of fixing much higher rate of Fair

Value to a wetland compared to residential plots having road

access, I feel that the District Collector shall pay his attention

to the grievance raised by the petitioner in Ext.P6

representation.

The writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the

2nd respondent-District Collector to consider Ext.P6 WP(C) No.27578 of 2022

representation submitted by the petitioner and pass

appropriate orders thereon, within a period of two months,

after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. It is

made clear that the demand made as per Ext.P3 will be

subject to any orders that may be passed by the

2nd respondent-District Collector on Ext.P6 representation.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH JUDGE spk WP(C) No.27578 of 2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 27578/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 THE COPY OF TAX RECEIPT DATED 29.5.2019 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, NEDUPURAM.

Exhibit P2 THE PHOTOGRAPHS, WHICH SHOWS THE PRESENT CULTIVATIONS IN THE PROPERTY COVERED BY EXHIBIT P1.

Exhibit P3 THE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT DATED 11.5.2022.

Exhibit P4        THE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGES OF THE FAIR
                  VALUE,     REGISTRATION       DEPARTMENT,

DOWNLOADED FROM THE GOVERNMENT SITE.

Exhibit P5        THE TRUE COPY OF REPLY SUBMITTED BY
                  THE   PETITIONER    BEFORE   RDO,   DATED
                  20.06.2022.
Exhibit P6        THE   TRUE   COPY    OF    REPRESENTATION
                  SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE

SECOND RESPONDENT DISTRICT COLLECTOR DATED 10.08.2022.

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS : NIL