Nikhil K.Gopinath vs Revenue Divisional Officer(Sub ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 6887 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
        THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 1ST ASHADHA, 1945
                       WP(C) NO. 19114 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

            NIKHIL K.GOPINATH
            AGED 31 YEARS, SON OF LATE N.K.GOPINATH,
            KARIVELITHUNDIYIL HOUSE, KUREEKAD VILLAGE,
            THIRUVANKULAM P.O., AMBADIMALA,
            ERNAKUKLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682305
            BY ADVS.
            K.JAGADEESH
            V.RENJU


RESPONDENTS:

    1       REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER (SUB COLLECTOR)
            FORT KOCHI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682001
    2       VIILLAGE OFFICER
            KUREEKAD VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK,
            ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682312


            SMT. AMMINIKUTTY - GP



     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.19114 of 2023
                                      2


                                JUDGMENT

Dated this the 22nd day of June, 2023

The petitioner, who is owner of 1.84 Ares of property

in Kureekad Village of Kanayannur Taluk in Ernakulam

District, has filed this writ petition seeking to direct the 1 st

respondent to consider Ext.P6 application and to pass orders

thereon, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

2. The petitioner submits that Ext.P6 application of the

petitioner in Form-6 of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land

and Wetland Rules, 2008 for changing the nature of his land in

Revenue Records, has been responded by Ext.P7, demanding

from the petitioner a conversion fee of Rs.81,972/-.

3. According to the petitioner, his land is having an

extent of 1.84 Ares only from the year 2007 and therefore

demand of fee is illegal.

4. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue

stands covered by a judgment of this Court reported in

Sumesh U. v. Revenue Divisional Officer, Palakkad and W.P.(C) No.19114 of 2023

Others [2023 (2) KLJ 390]. In the said decision, it is held that

the Revenue Divisional Officer shall pass appropriate orders

on the Form-6 application submitted by the petitioner without

insisting on payment of fee.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

and the learned Government Pleader representing the

respondents.

6. It is the specific case of the petitioner that from the

year 2007 onwards the piece of land now possessed by the

petitioner is only having an extent of 1.84 Ares as is evident

from Exts.P1 to P4. Levy of fee for changing nature of land in

revenue records is exempted for land upto an extent of 25

Cents. In such circumstances, I am of the view that the 1 st

respondent shall reconsider the demand for fee from the

petitioner.

7. Therefore, Ext.P7 is set aside to the extent of

demanding conversion fee from the petitioner. There will be a

direction to the 1st respondent to reconsider Ext.P6 application

submitted by the petitioner and pass orders afresh thereon, as W.P.(C) No.19114 of 2023

expeditiously as possible and at any rate, within a period of

one month.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH JUDGE SK W.P.(C) No.19114 of 2023

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19114/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT.P.1 TRUE COPY OF SALE DEED NO. 2650 /2007 OF SUB REGISTRARS OFFICE MULANTHURUTHY, DATED 30-06-2007 EXHIBIT.P.2 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.

I/3089/2012 OF SUB REGISTRARS OFFICE MULANTHURUTHY, DATED 12-11-2012 EXHIBIT.P.3 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 1750 / 2017 OF SUB REGISTRARS OFFICE MULANTHURUTHY, DATED 08-11-2017 EXHIBIT.P.4 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.622/I/2020 OF SUB REGISTRARS OFFICE MULANTHURUTHY, DATED 24-03-2020 EXHIBIT.P.5 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER(SUB COLLECTOR), FORT KOCHI DATED 31-03-2023 EXHIBIT.P.6 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, FORT KOCHI DATED 11-04-2023 EXHIBIT.P.7 EXTRACT OF THE SMS MESSAGE PURPORTEDLY SENT FROM THE OFFICE OF THE RDO, FORT KOCHI WAS RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT.P.8 A TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF G.O.NO.1166/2021 DATED 25-2-2021 EXHIBIT.P.9 A TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE JUDGMENT REPORTED IN 2023(2)KLJ 390 (SUMESH.U. VS. RDO),

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL