Kerala High Court
Geevarghese vs The District Collector on 11 October, 1993
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2014/19TH CHAITHRA, 1936
WP(C).NO. 10102 OF 2014 (K)
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-------------
GEEVARGHESE
S/O. KUNJUKUNJU,
THONDALIL PUTHEN VEEDU,
PANAVELI P.O., KOTTARAKKARA,
PIN -691 532.
BY ADV. SRI.N.SASANKAN PILLAI
RESPONDENT(S):
-------------
1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM - 691013.
2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM - 691013.
3. THE TAHSILDAR,
TALUK OFFICE, KOTTARAKKARA - 691506.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K.T. LILLY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09-04-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
NS
WP(C).NO. 10102 OF 2014 (K)
----------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :
-----------------------
EXHIBIT-P1- COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 3436/93 DATED 11/10/1993 OF
KOTTARAKKARA SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE.
EXHIBIT-P2-COPY OF LOCATION SKETCH ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
KOTTRARAKKARA.
EXHIBIT-P3-COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE AGRICULTURAL
OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN, KOTTARAKKARA DATED 05/06/2013.
EXHIBIT-P4- COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 09/05/2013
ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOTTARAKKARA.
EXHIBIT-P5- COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE NATURE OF LAND, ROAD
ACCESS AND BUILDINGS IN THE ADJOINING PROPERTIES.
EXHIBIT-P6- COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14/08/2013 SENT TO THE 3RD
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT-P7- COPY OF THE APPLICATION ALONG WITH THE REPLY RECEIVED
FROM VILLAGE OFFICER, KOTTRAKKARA DATED 21/06/2013.
EXHIBIT-P8- COPY OF THE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM THE SECRETARY,
GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KOTTARAKKARA DATED 08/07/2013.
EXHIBIT-P9- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 11/12/2013 MADE BEFORE
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM.
EXHIBIT-P10- COPY OF RECEIPT OF EXHIBIT-P9 REPRESENTATION VIDE
NO. 66444/3 DATED 11/12/2013.
EXHIBIT-P11- COPY OF LETTER DATED 28/12/2013 FORWARDING THEREWITH
EXHIBIT P9 REPRESENTATION TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY 1ST
RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL
------------------------
/ TRUE COPY /
NS P.A. TO JUDGE
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
---------------------------------------
W.P.C. No.10102 OF 2014
---------------------------------------
Dated this the 9th day of April, 2014.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner have approached this Court with the following prayers:-
"i. To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Exhibit P9 application within a time limit;
ii. To issue a further direction directing the respondents to treat the property covered by Exhibit P1 title deed as "dry land" for all purposes; and iii. To pass such other order and further orders as are deeded just and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case."
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the property involved herein is actually a garden land and never a 'paddy land' or 'wet land' as defined under Section 2(xii) or 2(xviii) of Act 28 of 2008. The factual question is sought to be substantiated with reference to Ext.P3 Certificate issued by the Agricultural Officer, Krishi Bhavan, Kottarakkara, Ext.P4 Possession Certificate issued by the Village Officer and Ext.P5 photographs. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, since the property has been shown as 'nilam' in the BTR, the W.P.C.No.10102 of 2014 2 petitioner is not in a position to make use of the property in an effective manner and hence this petition.
3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well, who submits on instructions that, in the Data Bank Register, it is shown as a 'paddy land'; however with the remark that it was partly reclaimed three years back. The law is now well settled that, if the property was actually not a paddy land or wet land as on the date of commencement of the Act, the provisions of Act 28 of 2008 are not attracted, as held by this Court in Jaffarkhan V. Kochumarakkar [2012 (1) KLT 491]. Similarly, it has also been held by a Division Bench of this Court in Praveen V. Land Revenue Commissioner [2010 (2) KLT 617] that, if the provisions of the Act 28 of 2008 are not applicable, the claim has necessarily to be considered with reference to the relevant provisions of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order. It is seen that the petitioners have already approached 1st respondent by filing Ext.P6 application in this regard.
In the said circumstances, there will be a direction to the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P9 application in accordance with W.P.C.No.10102 of 2014 3 law, particularly under 'clause 6' of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order and pass appropriate orders after conducting a site inspection with notice to the petitioners and after giving an opportunity of hearing. This exercise shall be completed at the earliest, at any rate, within 'two months' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
The petitioners shall produce a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of the writ petition, before the 1st respondent, for further steps.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE sp