Kerala High Court
Wilson K.V vs The State Of Kerala on 6 January, 2021
Author: A.Muhamed Mustaque
Bench: A.Muhamed Mustaque
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
WEDNESDAY, THE 06TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 16TH POUSHA, 1942
WP(C).No.28928 OF 2020(M)
PETITIONER:
WILSON K.V.
AGED 59 YEARS
S/O K.VARGHESE, KANNANGATH HOUSE P.O.PERINJANAM,
THIRSSUR-680 686.
BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REP BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, REVENUE
DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
COLLECTORATE, AYYANHOLE, THRISSUR-680 003.
3 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
CIVIL STATION, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680
121.
4 THE PERINJANAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PERINJANAM P.O.THRISSUR
DISTRICT, PIN-680 686.
5 THE CONVENER,
LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE, PERINJANAM GRAMA
PANCHAYATH, PERINJANAM P.O.THRISSUR-680 686
ADV. SRI.S GOPINATHAN SR GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.28928 OF 2020(M)
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 6th day of January 2021 The petitioner approached the Revenue Divisional Officer under Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order, 1967. The land is comprised in Survey No.292/2012 of Perinjanam Village, Kodungallur Taluk. Total extent of the land is 45 cents. The application was considered pursuant to the direction in the judgment in WP(C) No.16381 of 2017 dated 16.05.2017.
2. The application has been rejected on 21.08.2020 stating that it cannot be considered as the request is for utilising the land for the construction of a building.
3. Admittedly, the application was submitted under the KLUO prior to incorporation of Section 27 A of Act 28 of 2008. The point that arises for consideration is whether the petitioner is entitled to utilise the land for other purposes.
4. KLUO is a subordinate legislation issued under the Essential Commodities Act,1955. The very purpose of the KLUO is to WP(C).No.28928 OF 2020(M) 3 augment food cultivation. Looking at the scheme of KLOU, in the frame work of Essential Commodities Act it can be seen that such exercise of power under KLOU is required only for the purpose of augmenting food cultivation and for the cultivation of the food crops which where in cultivation. The impugned order does not state that the land is required for any cultivation of food crops. What stated is that permission cannot be granted for construction of a building. If the land is not required for any cultivation of food crops which where in cultivation, the Collector under KLUO cannot withhold permission.
In the light of the fact that the land is not required for any cultivation of food crops, I am of the view that impugned order has to be set aside. Accordingly, it is set aside. Accordingly, the petitioner is declared to have the permission and the permission under Clause 6 of the KLUO is for utilising the land for other purposes. There is no necessity to remit the case back to the Collector for fresh consideration, as no purpose would be served by such exercise. If the petitioner intends to construct a commercial building, local authority shall act u pon this declaration and grant permit in accordance with WP(C).No.28928 OF 2020(M) 4 law, without insisting any further orders from the Revenue Authority under KLUO or under Section 27A of Act 28 of 2008.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
SAS/06/01/2021 JUDGE
WP(C).No.28928 OF 2020(M)
5
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT BEARING NO 394
OF 93 OF THE MATHILAKAM S R O DATED
3.2.1993
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION BY THE
FOURTH RESPONDENT DATED 20.2.2016
EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE
ISSUED BY THE PERINJANAM VILLAGE OFFICE DATED 27.1.2016 EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH OF SY NO 292/2012 OF THE PERINJANAM VILLAGE ISSUED DATED 1.12.2015 EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST MADE BY THE PETITIONER AND REPLY GIVEN DATED 19.2.2016 EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE PERINJANAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH DATED 20.2.2016 EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF THE ADDL.TAHSILDAR, KODUNGALLUR DATED NIL EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN BY THE PETITIONER DATED NIL EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT DATED 30.3.2017 EXHIBIT P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE RDO DATED 30.3.2017 EXHIBIT P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO 16381 OF 2017 DATED 16.5.2017 EXHIBIT P12 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 7.3.2019 EXHIBIT P13 A TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 21.8.2020 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:- NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE