Shamsath Beegam R vs The Revenue Divisional Officer
2024 Latest Caselaw 23268 Ker

Kerala High Court

Shamsath Beegam R vs The Revenue Divisional Officer on 2 August, 2024

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                              PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
   FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST 2024 / 11TH SRAVANA, 1946
                      WP(C) NO. 9387 OF 2024
PETITIONER:

         SHAMSATH BEEGAM R,
         AGED 43 YEARS
         W/O S NAZAR, 7/446,KIZHAKKETHALA, KODUVAYUR,
         PALAKKAD , KERALA, PIN - 678501
         BY ADV SARATH M.S.


RESPONDENTS:

    1    THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
         OFFICE OF THE RDO, PARAKKUNNAM, VYDYUTH
         NAGAR,PALAKKAD, PIN - 678001
    2    THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
         KRISHI BHAVAN,KODUVAYUR (PO),
         PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678501
    3    THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
         KODUVAYUR 1 VILLAGE,PALAKKAD, PIN - 678501
         SMT.PREETHA K.K., SR.GP

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
02.08.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C)No.9387/2024
                                            ..2..


                        MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., J
                      ..................................................

                            W.P.(C)No.9387/2024
                          ..........................................

                  Dated this the 2nd day of August, 2024

                                      JUDGMENT

The petitioner challenges Ext.P2, an order passed under

Form 5 of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act

and Rules. A reading of Ext.P2 shows that the same is a non-

speaking one without consideration of any of the relevant

aspects. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that most of

the properties in the same survey number have been deleted

from the Data Bank.

2. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 1st

respondent or the authorised officer, to reconsider the Form 5

application submitted by the petitioner, taking note of the other

orders passed with respect to similar lands, within a period of one

month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The

..3..

period of one month is fixed taking note of the urgency pointed

out by the learned counsel that the petitioner is an applicant for a

house under the LIFE project.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

MOHAMMED NIAS C.P. JUDGE ACR

..4..

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9387/2024

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENT NO.

1645/1/2019 DATED 06.09.2019 OF S.R.O CHITTUR Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.J 228473/2020 DATED 06-02-2021 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 08-11-2021 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE EXTENSTION OFFICER, KODUVAYUR Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO RDOPKD/353/2023- M1 ISSUED TO SMT SHAJITHA BY 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 27-10-2023 Exhibit P5 AND TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO RDOPKD/4708/2021/M1 ISSUED TO SMT JASMINE BY 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 20-03-2023