Kerala High Court
A.V.Jose vs Chelakkara Grama Panchayath on 10 June, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.MANU
MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 20TH JYAISHTA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 5300 OF 2017
PETITIONER:
A.V.JOSE
AGED 72 YEARS
S/O A.J.VARGHESE, AGED 72 YEARS, DIRECTOR, SPRING
MIST SPORTS & GAMES PRIVATE LIMITED, CHELAKKARA,
THRISSUR-680 586. (RESIDING AT ALUKKA HOUSE, MISSION
QUARTERS, EAST FORT, THRISSUR-680 001).
BY ADVS.
SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON
SRI.P.S.APPU
SRI.A.R.NIMOD
RESPONDENTS:
1 CHELAKKARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CHELAKKARA P.O.,
THRISSUR-680 586.
2 THE CONVENER
LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE, (UNDER THE KERALA
CONSERVATION OF PADDY & WET LANDS ACT), CHELAKKARA
GRAMA PANCHAYATH, CHELAKKARA P.O., THRISSUR-680 586.
OTHER PRESENT:
GP- SRI.M.RAJEEV
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
10.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 5300 OF 2017
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner holds property extending to 143.71 Ares in
Sy.Nos.78/3, 80/3, 81/P, 83/1 and 84/P of Chelakkara Village in
Thrissur, within the limits of the 1 st respondent - Panchayath.
The petitioner wanted to construct an Ayurveda Hospital building
in his property. He therefore, submitted application for building
permit before the 1st respondent. By order dated 25.04.2015, the
1st respondent - Panchayath has rejected the request for building
permit stating that the property belonging to the petitioner has
been shows as 'Nilam' in revenue records.
2. Aggrieved by the rejection of the building permit, the
petitioner approached this Court through W.P.(C)No.16587/2015.
By judgment dated 05.08.2015, this Court quashed the order
issued by the Panchayath and directed the Panchayath to
consider the request of the petitioner after ascertaining whether
the land in question is any longer suitable for paddy cultivation.
3. Pursuant to the judgment of this Court in W.P.
(C)No.16587/2015, the 1st respondent again considered the
application for building permit. To the dismay of the petitioner,
the application was again rejected by Ext.P4 order dated
31.12.2015.
WP(C) NO. 5300 OF 2017
4. On receipt of Ext.P4, the petitioner approached this
Court again with the present writ petition. On 16.02.2017, when
the case came up for admission, this Court passed an interim
order directing the Agricultural Officer to seek a report of the lie
and nature of the property as it remained on the date of coming
into force of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland
Act, 2008, from the Director, Kerala State Remote Sensing and
Environment Centre.
5. Further, the Agricultural Officer was directed to conduct
physical inspection of the property after receipt of the report from
the Kerala State Remote Sensing and Environment Centre and to
submit a report before this Court as to the lie and nature of the
property. This Court also directed that the report of the Local
Level Monitoring Committee (LLMC) should indicate, whether or
not on the basis of the enquiry conducted by it, the LLMC is of the
opinion that the land in question is to be included in the land data
bank as paddy land or wetland.
6. In compliance with the interim direction issued by this
Court, the learned Special Government Pleader (Revenue)
produced a report of the Director, Kerala State Remote Sensing
and Environment Centre and report of the Convener of LLMC
along with minutes of the LLMC held on 18.05.2017.
WP(C) NO. 5300 OF 2017
7. I have heard the respective learned counsel for the parties
and perused the writ petition and also the documents produced
by the Special Government Pleader (Revenue).
8. The minutes of the LLMC meeting held on 18.05.2017
reveals that the paddy cultivation is not taking place in the nearby
properties. The LLMC has observed that the property in question
is not part of any paddy field.
9. It is also observed by the LLMC that the parcels of land in
some of the survey numbers held by the petitioner have been
described as 'Parambu' in the data bank, whereas, land comprised
in some of the survey numbers have been described as 'Nilam'
and 'paddy land'.
10. The LLMC has also observed that construction activities
in the properties may lead to water logging and therefore,
sufficient precaution to avoid water logging shall be ensured in
advance.
11. Taking note of the report of the LLMC and other
documents produced by the learned Special Government Pleader
(Revenue), I am of the view that the Panchayath has to consider
the matter afresh.
12. The inputs from the part of the LLMC are very relevant
regarding the lie and nature of the property. The LLMC is the
WP(C) NO. 5300 OF 2017
proper Authority with regard to the applicability of the provisions
of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act.
13. Therefore, I set aside Ext.P4 order of the Panchayath.
The 1st respondent - Panchayath shall consider the application of
the petitioner for building permit afresh, taking note of the report
and minutes of the LLMC meeting produced before this Court.
Before taking a decision in the matter, the Secretary of the
Panchayath shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the
petitioner and to submit necessary documents. The hearing shall
be conducted within a period of four weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this judgment. To enable the Panchayath to
take a proper decision, the petitioner shall produce copies of the
report and minutes of the LLMC meeting along with a copy of this
judgment before the Secretary of the Panchayath. Final decision
in the matter shall be taken and communicated to the petitioner
within an outer time limit of two months from the date of receipt
of a copy of this judgment.
This writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
S.MANU
JUDGE
rp
WP(C) NO. 5300 OF 2017
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5300/2017
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE
OFFICER, CHELKKARA TO THE PETITIONER DATED 16-4-2015.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
PANCHAYATH TO THE PETITIONER DATED 25-4-2015.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.16587/2015 ON THE FILE
OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT DATED 05-08-2015.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A4-4067/2015 PASSED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT DATED 31-12-2015.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF SANCTION ISSUED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT FOR THE CONDUCT OF AN AMUSEMENT PARK DATED 7-9-
2016.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPIES OF PHOTOGRAPHS WHICH SHOW THE FUNCTIONING OF
THE AMUSEMENT PARK.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPIES OF FEW PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE LAND IN QUESTION .
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE QUERY PUT FORWARD BY THE PETITIONER UNDER
THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT DATED 14-1-2016.
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY GIVEN BY THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
TO THE PETITIONER DATED 9-2-2016.
EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND
R ESPONDENT DATED 27-7-2016.
