Kerala High Court
Antony Mathew vs Bindu Saji on 10 February, 2025
W. A. Nos. 2632 & 2747 of 2015
-1-
2025:KER:14947
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. NITIN JAMDAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.MANU
MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 21ST MAGHA, 1946
WA NO. 2632 OF 2015
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 03.11.2015 IN WPC NO.27697
OF 2014 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT/S:
ANTONY MATHEW
AGED 45 YEARS
S/O.MATHEW,KADAVELIL HOUSE,ELANJI.P.O,KOTTAYAM-
686665.
BY ADVS.
SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE
SMT.ACHU SUBHA ABRAHAM
SMT.K.R.MONISHA
SMT.A.SREEKALA
SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE
RESPONDENT/S:
1 BINDU SAJI
AGED 42 YEARS
W/O.SAJI MATTATHIL,PUTHENPURAYIL
HOUSE,ALAPURAM,ELANJI,MUVATTUPUZHA,ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT-686674.
2 GOVERNMENT OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION COMMISSIONER,
AGRICULTURAL DEPARTMENT (NCA
DEPARTMENT)SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
W. A. Nos. 2632 & 2747 of 2015
-2-
2025:KER:14947
3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
ERNAKULAM-682030.
4 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
ELANJI,REPRESENTING THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING
COMMITTEE,CONSTITUTED AS PER SECTION 5 OF THE
CONSERVATION OF PADDY LAND AND WETLAND
ACT,2008,ELANJI,KOOTHATTUKULAM,MUVATTUPUZHA-
686662.
5 THE INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,REGISTERED
OFFICE AT BANDRA(EAST),MUMBAI-400051.
6 THE CHIEF DIVISIONAL RETAIL SALES MANAGER
INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD,COCHIN DIVISIONAL
OFFICE,PANAMPILLY NAGAR,ERNAKULAM-682036.
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.K.AKHIL
SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR
SRI.K.JAYAKUMAR SR.
SRI.T.R.KANNAN
SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN
SMT. RAMOLA NAYANPALLI
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI K P HARISH, SR.GP
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
10.02.2025, ALONG WITH WA.2747/2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W. A. Nos. 2632 & 2747 of 2015
-3-
2025:KER:14947
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. NITIN JAMDAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.MANU
MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 21ST MAGHA, 1946
WA NO. 2747 OF 2015
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 03.11.2015 IN WPC NO.27697
OF 2014 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT/S:
1 GOVERNMENT OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION COMMISSIONER,
AGRICULATURAL DEPARTMENT (NCA DEPARTMENT)
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
ERNAKULAM 682030
3 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
ELANJI, REPRESENTING THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING
COMMITTEE, CONSTITUTED AS PER SEC. 5 OF THE
COSERVATION OF PADDY LAND AND WETLAND ACT 2008,
ELANJI, KOOTHATTUKULAM, MUVATTUPUZHA-686662.
BY ADV. K. P. HARISH, SR. GP.
RESPONDENT/S:
1 BINDU SAJI
W/O. SAJI MATTATHIL, PUTHENPURAYIL HOUSE,
ALAPURAM, ELANJI, MUVATTUPUZHA. ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT-686674.
2 THE INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD.
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, REGISTERED
W. A. Nos. 2632 & 2747 of 2015
-4-
2025:KER:14947
OFFICE AT BANDRA(EAST) MUMBAI-400051.
3 THE CHIEF DIVISIONAL RETAIL SALES MANAGER
INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD., KOCHIN DIVISIONAL
OFFICE, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM-682036.
4 ANTONY MATHEW
S/O.MATHEW, KADAVELIL HOUSE, ELANJI PO, KOTTAYAM
686665
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS
SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR
SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE
SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE
SMT.K.R.MONISHA
SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI
SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN
SRI. T. A. UNNIKRISHNAN
SMT. RAMOLA NAYANPALLI
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
10.02.2025, ALONG WITH WA.2632/2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W. A. Nos. 2632 & 2747 of 2015
-5-
2025:KER:14947
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 10th day of February, 2025
Nitin Jamdar, C. J.
These two appeals are filed challenging the order dated 3
November 2015 passed by the learned Single Judge in W. P. (C) No.
27697 of 2014. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge
directed Respondent No. 1 / Original Petitioner to approach the
District Collector for the utilization of 10 cents of land under Clause 6
of the Kerala Land Utilization Order, 1967, for the purpose of
establishing Kisan Seva Kendra for which dealership was to be given by
the Respondent Indian Oil Corporation. As regards the conversion
aspect of 33.25 cents of land was concerned, liberty was given to the
State to take necessary action.
2. Heard Ms. K. R. Monisha, learned counsel for the Appellants in
W. A. No. 2632 of 2015, Mr. K. P. Harish, learned Senior
Government Pleader appearing for the Appellant State in W. A. No.
2747 of 2015, Mr. Arjun Varma, learned counsel representing Mr. T.
A. Unnikrishnan, learned counsel for Respondent No. 1 and Ms.
Ramola Nayanpalli, learned counsel representing Mr. M. Gopikrishnan
Nambiar, learned Standing Counsel for the Respondent Corporation.
3. Though the entire extent of land claimed by the Petitioner was
43.250 cents, segregation of 10 cents was made because the Petitioner
wanted this 10 cents for setting up the Kisan Seva Kendra. In W. A.
No. 2632 of 2015, by an interim order dated 25 January 2016, the
W. A. Nos. 2632 & 2747 of 2015
2025:KER:14947
Division Bench observed that the conversion of 10 cents shall be
provisional and there shall be no further conversion of the paddy land
in view of the pendency of the appeal.
4. Learned counsel for the Indian Oil Corporation states that no
Kisan Seva Kendra has come up on the site in the last 10 years.
Therefore, it is clear that the purpose of making segregation, as far as
the controversy regarding legal or illegal conversion of the land, has
now lost its relevance. Thus both the parcels of lands need not be
separately dealt with.
5. The writ petition was filed by Respondent No. 1 / Original
Petitioner being aggrieved by Ext. P8 order issued by the Government
of Kerala dated 3 February 2014 on an application filed by the
Original Petitioner on 22 May 2013. In this application, the Original
Petitioner had challenged the prohibitory order issued in respect of the
conversion of the land in Survey No. 318/10 and for stoppage of the
construction activity. The Petitioner had stated that a notification was
issued by the Indian Oil Corporation; she was selected and, therefore,
would require the property which is duly and lawfully converted for
the purpose of setting up the Kisan Seva Kendra. The Village Officer
reported that 10 cents (0.04 ares) in Survey No. 318/10 of the Village
was obtained by the Petitioner as per Deed No. 755/2010 of SRO,
Koothattukulam dated 30.03.2010 and 33 ¼ cents in the same survey
number as per Deed No. 2406/2008 which is in her possession and
included in Thandaper No. 8210 and that she is paying the tax.
6. The property is situated on the eastern side of Piravom-Pala Road,
W. A. Nos. 2632 & 2747 of 2015
2025:KER:14947
approximately 500 meters from Elanji junction, Muvattupuzha Taluk,
Ernakulam District. As per the Basic Tax Register, 75 cents in Survey
No. 318/10 is lying as wetland and 10 cents out of the same is in the
name of one Mr. C. A Augusti, s/o. Augusti, Cherumthadathil House,
Elenji Village and permission was granted by the Revenue Divisional
Officer to the said Augusti for filling up 5 cents of land for the
construction of a house as per Order No. A9.7349/2008 dated
06.01.2008. The Petitioner purchased that 10 cents as per Deed No.
755/10 dated 13 March 2020 from Mr. Augusti. This property and the
other property having a total extent of 43¼ cents in Survey No.
318/10 are in the name of the Petitioner. On site inspection, it was
found that the said 43¼ cents of Nilam is lying in one plot, and the
same is filled with red soil at the height of 5 feet after constructing a
stone wall around the property. The property is bounded on the east
and south by a Thodu, on the west by PWD road and on the north by a
Nilam belonging to one Mr. Joseph, Mullanmadathil House. It is for
the 10 cents forming part of this property that the Indian Oil
Corporation has granted dealership to the Petitioner and that property
is demarcated by a compound wall.
7. The Village Officer has reported that permission was granted to
Mr. Augusti by the Revenue Divisional Officer for constructing a
house in 5 cents by filling up the land in Survey No. 318/10 and that
land was purchased by the Petitioner and she filled up the Nilam
having an extent of 43¼ cents. Based on this report of the Village
Officer, what was purchased by the Petitioner was five cents, which was
permitted for the construction of a house and there could not have
W. A. Nos. 2632 & 2747 of 2015
2025:KER:14947
been permission for conversion of 10 cents.
8. When the order was challenged before the learned Single Judge,
the learned Single Judge referred to two documents, Exts. P4 and P9 to
conclude that 10 cents of land was converted before the coming into
force of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act,
2008 (Act of 2008) and proceeded to issue the impugned directions.
Ext. P4 dated 24 October 2013 is the report of the District Collector
placed before the State and Ext. P9, dated 6 January 2009, is the order
of the Revenue Divisional Officer. The Revenue Divisional Officer in
Ext. P9 observed that as regards the said 10 cents of land, only a part
thereof was converted by the earlier owner. In Ext. P4, the District
Collector has observed that 10 cents, which was in possession of the
Petitioner, was declared prior to coming into force of the Act of 2008.
According to the learned Senior Government Pleader, the direction in
respect of 10 cents could not have been issued because the earlier
owner was given permission only to the extent of five cents. This was
the stand taken in the counter affidavit filed before the learned Single
Judge.
9. In the impugned order, we do not find any detailed discussion
except for reference to these two documents. It has to be seen as to
what the position was before the Petitioner purchased the land from
the earlier owner and to what extent the land was permitted to be
converted. Since these aspects are missing in the impugned order, we
are of the opinion that, considering the fact that the very purpose of
segregation of a part of the land is now lost and the State will anyway
be carrying out an enquiry in respect of the 33.25 cents of the land, the
W. A. Nos. 2632 & 2747 of 2015
2025:KER:14947
entire aspect be considered by the Respondent Authorities as regards
the conversion of the land.
10. Therefore, we dispose of the appeals by modifying the order
passed by the learned Single Judge and directing the Revenue Officials
and concerned authorities to take a decision as regards the status of the
entire land belonging to the Petitioner as to whether it was correctly
and legally converted, and if so, to what extent, and take such necessary
corrective measures. We also give liberty to the Petitioner to apply to
the State in case regularization is permissible under law. Let the State
take a decision in respect of the matter and pass a reasoned order after
giving an opportunity to the Petitioner within a period of eight weeks
from today. As regards the appeal filed by the Additional Respondent is
concerned, we need not independently decide the same. Even
otherwise, the Additional Respondent only claims to be a resident of
the Village and not an immediate neighbour.
11. The appeals are accordingly disposed of in above terms.
Sd/-
NITIN JAMDAR
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
S. MANU
JUDGE
Eb
