Suseelan vs Agriculture Production ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 913 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
  TUESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 27TH POUSHA, 1944
                   WP(C) NO. 28751 OF 2012


PETITIONER:
          SUSEELAN
          AGED 37 YEARS, S/O. RAGHAVAN NAIR,
          MANGATTU PUTHENPURAYIL HOUSE,
          MAZHUVANNOOR VILLAGE, NELLAD P.O.,
          ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
          BY ADVS.SRI.R.T.PRADEEP
          SRI.P.BIJIMON
          SRI.A.S.SABU

RESPONDENTS:
    1     AGRICULTURE PRODUCTION COMMISSIONER
          DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, SECRETARIAT,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001
    2     DISTRICT COLLECTOR
          CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM-682030
    3     TAHSILDAR
          KUNNATHUNAD TALUK, ERNAKULAM-683542
    4     VILLAGE OFFICER
          MAZHUVANNOOR VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-686689.
    5     AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
          KRISHI BHAVAN, MAZHUVANNOOR, NELLAD,
          ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-686721
    6     THANKAMANI NAIR
          D/O. KESAVAN NAIR, MANGATTU HOUSE,
          NELLAD KARA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-686721
 ADDL.R7 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
          MUVATTUPUZHA
          IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS ADDL.R7 AS PER ORDER
          DATED 17.1.2023.
          BY ADVS.SRI.K.M.FAISAL, GP
          SRI.A.R.BEJOY
          SRI.GEORGE KURUVILLAALAPPUZHA
    THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 17.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.28751/2012

                                   2




                    P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                     --------------------------------
                    W.P.(C).No.28751 of 2012
              ----------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 17th day of January, 2023


                            JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed with following prayers:

i. To issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction to quash Exts.P5 and P7.

ii. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction to 2nd respondent to take a decision on Ext.P4 by reckoning Ext.P3.

iii. Such other reliefs which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.

(SIC)

2. According to the petitioner, he is the absolute

owner in possession of 4.05 Ares of land as per Sale Deed

No.4230/2011. It is the case of the petitioner that the 6 th

respondent, who is his cousin sister, filed a false frivolous

complaint before the 2nd respondent alleging that she was not

able to cultivate paddy land in her property because of the WP(C).No.28751/2012

reclamation carried out in the property of the petitioner. The

4th respondent, as per Ext.P3, submitted a report before the

additional 7th respondent stating that there is no paddy

cultivation in the land for the last 15 years. But, as per Ext.P5

order, the 2nd respondent ordered to reclaim the property of

the petitioner and restore the same to paddy land. The

petitioner filed an appeal before the 1st respondent. The same

is dismissed as evident by Ext.P7. Hence this writ petition.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

the learned Government Pleader. I also heard the counsel for

the 6th respondent.

4. The counsel for the petitioner reiterated the

contentions raised in the writ petition. The Government

Pleader submitted that there is nothing to interfere with the

impugned orders. The counsel for the 6 th respondent takes me

through Ext.R6(a) report of the Agricultural Officer in which it

is stated that paddy cultivation was done there before two

years.

5. I do not want to make any observation about the

merit of the case. In the light of the Kerala Conservation of

Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008, the remedy of the WP(C).No.28751/2012

petitioner is to approach the Revenue Divisional Officer with

appropriate application. If such an application is received, the

Revenue Divisional Officer can be directed to consider the

same untrammeled by any observation in the impugned orders

in this writ petition.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of in the

following manner:

1. The petitioner is free to submit appropriate

application as per the Kerala Conservation of

Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 before the

additional 7th respondent within one month from

the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

2. Once such an application is received, the

additional 7th respondent will consider the same

and pass appropriate orders in it, untrammeled

by any observation in Exts.P5 and P7, after

affording an opportunity of hearing to the

petitioner and the 6th respondent, as

expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four

months from the date of receipt of the

application.

WP(C).No.28751/2012

3. Ext.P5 and P7 orders will be subject to the final

orders to be passed by the additional 7 th

respondent as directed above.

sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JV JUDGE WP(C).No.28751/2012

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 28751/2012

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.4230/2011 DATED 4.8.2011, Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT OF THE PROPERTY DATED 12.09.2011.

Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 24.05.2011 OF 5TH RESPONDENT BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 27.09.2011 BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28.03.2012 BY 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE CULTIVATION OF PROPERTY OF PETITIONER.

Exhibit P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 12.11.2012 BY 1ST RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENT EXHIBITS Exhibit R6 (A) THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 7/5/11.

Exhibit R6(B) THE TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION.

Exhibit R6(C) THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 6/5/11 BEFORE THE RDO.

Exhibit R6(D) THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE RDO DATED 18.08.11.

Exhibit R6(E0 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR DATED 9/1/12.