Kerala High Court
C.Subash Chandra Bose vs State Of Kerala on 13 July, 2015
Author: K. Vinod Chandran
Bench: K.Vinod Chandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF AUGUST 2017/31ST SRAVANA, 1939
WP(C).No. 10538 of 2017 (N)
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-----------------------
C.SUBASH CHANDRA BOSE,
S/O. GOVINDANKUTTY MENON,
CHINGAPURATH HOUSE,
PO., THRIKKUR, THRISSUR,
PIN-680314.
BY ADVS.SMT.M.R.JAYALATHA
SMT.P.SREESHA
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE ,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001
2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
CIVIL STATION AYYANTHOLE,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680003
3. THE TAHSILDAR,
MUKUNDAPURAM,MINI CIVIL STATION,
IRINJALAKUDA, IRINJALAKUDA PO.,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680121,
4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
KALLUR VILLAGE,KALLUR,
PO., THRISSUR DISTIRCT, PIN-680317,
5. THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE,
REP. BY AGRICULTURE OFFICER AND CONVENER,
THRIKKUR PO., THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680314
6. THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
KRISHI BHAVAN, THRIKKUR THRIKKUR PO.,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680314.
BY ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL SRI.RANJITH THAMPAN.
SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.H.HANIL KUMAR.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 22-08-2017, ALONG WITH WPC.NO.19710/2017 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
TS
WP(C).No. 10538 of 2017 (N)
-----------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
--------------------------------------
EXHIBIT P1: A TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE LAY AND
NATURE OF THE PROPERTY.
EXHIBIT P2: A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF INTENT DATED 13.07.2015
ISSUED BY INDIAN OIL CORPORATION.
EXHIBIT P3: A TRUE COPY OF THE NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE THRISSUR DATED 18.3.2016.
EXHIBIT P4: A TRUE COPY OF THE NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY
FIRE AND RESCUE DEPARTMENT DATED 22.8.2015.
EXHIBIT P5: A TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT TO ESTABLISH ISSUED BY THE
POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD DATED 19.1.2016.
EXHIBIT P6: A TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLOSIVES LICENCE ISSUED BY THE
CONTROLLER OF EXPLOSIVES DATED 17.3.2016.
EXHIBIT P7: A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE
EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD ROAD DIVISION TO THE DISTRICT
COLLECTOR THRISSUR DATED 8.9.2015.
EXHIBIT P8: A TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE
VILLAGE OFFICER DATED 18.11.2015.
EXHIBIT P9; A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE DATA BANK
ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER DATED 26.3.2016.
EXHIBIT P10: A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 20.6.2016 SUBMITTED
TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P11: A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.3134 OF 2016
DATED 30.8.2016.
EXHIBIT P12: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18.3.2017
ORDER NO.K.DIS/185/17/B2 ISSUED BY RDO, THRISSUR .
EXHIBIT P13: A TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 22.12.2016 ISSUED BY
THE 1ST RESPONDENT,CIRCULAR NO.46848/01/2016 REVENUE.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS - NIL
------------------------------------------------
/TRUE COPY/
PS TO JUDGE
TS
K. Vinod Chandran, J
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C).Nos.10538 of 2017-N, 14486 of 2017-I, 19710 of 2017-K,
20419 of 2017-B, 21215 of 2017-B, 21288 of 2017-I,
21908 of 2017-K, 23006 of 2017-A & 23183 of 2017-W.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 22nd day of August, 2017
JUDGMENT
All these writ petitions are concerned with a Circular issued by the Government, bearing Circular No.46848/P1/2016/Revenue dated 22.12.2016 restricting the conversion of user for construction of residential buildings alone and that too in Panchayats 10 cents and in Municipalities and Corporations 5 cents. The District Collectors/ Revenue Divisional Officers, before whom the applications are filed, have either rejected the applications or are not considering the same for reason of the Circular. The said Circular has been set aside by this Court in the decision reported in Shivadasan v. Revenue Divisional Officer [2017 (3) KLT 822]. In such circumstances, the writ petitions are disposed of in the following manner:
W.P.(C) No.10538 of 2017
2. The petitioner is concerned with 7 cents of property comprised in Survey No.385/3 of Thrikkur village. The petitioner's property is not included in the data bank prepared under Section 5(4)(i) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 [for WP(C) No.10538 of 2017 & - 2 - connected cases brevity "Paddy Land Act"] is the contention raised. The petitioner filed an application under Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order, 1967 [for brevity "KLU Order"], at Exhibit P10, before the Revenue Divisional Officer [for brevity "RDO"]. The RDO by Exhibit P12 rejected the same on the ground of Exhibit P13 Circular. Exhibit P13 has been set aside in Shivadasan. In such circumstances, the RDO shall re-consider Exhibit P10 application under Clause 6 of the KLU Order in accordance with the directions/declaration in Shivadasan, after getting a report from the Local Level Monitoring Committee [for brevity "LLMC"] as to whether the property is included and if included, the exact description as available from the data bank; to facilitate which Exhibit P12 is set aside. The same shall be done within a period of two months.
W.P.(C) No.14486 of 2017
3. The petitioner is the absolute owner in possession of 24.08 Ares of land in Survey No.774/1 of Mellor Village in Thrissur District. He has constructed a commercial building in the property, after obtaining a building permit. The local authority initiated steps to cancel building permit on the ground that the property is described as "paddy land" in the revenue records. The petitioner filed reply to the notice; WP(C) No.10538 of 2017 & - 3 -
connected cases but, however, the local authority insisted for an order of conversion. Accordingly, the petitioner was before the District Collector under Clause 6 of the KLU Order, which application was rejected by Exhibit P14 based on Exhibit P15 Circular. Exhibit P15 has been set aside by this Court in Shivadasan. Exhibits P16 and P17 are not applicable to the case of the petitioner. In the above circumstances, the District Collector shall re-consider Exhibit P12 application under Clause 6 of the KLU Order in accordance with the directions/declaration in Shivadasan, after getting a report from the Local Level Monitoring Committee [for brevity "LLMC"] as to whether the property is included and if included, the exact description as available from the data bank; to facilitate which Exhibit P14 is set aside. The same shall be done within a period of two months.
W.P.(C) No.19710 of 2017
4. The petitioner is the owner in possession of 15.25 cents of land, comprised in Survey No.127/1 of Cheriyamundam Village in Tirur Taluk. The land in question is included in the data bank as "converted land". The petitioner had applied for a building permit, which was rejected; against which the petitioner filed an appeal before the District Collector and then approached this Court. This Court, by WP(C) No.10538 of 2017 & - 4 - connected cases Exhibit P2 directed consideration of a representation for correction in the data bank register. On consideration, the District Collector rejected the request, at Exhibit P5. The petitioner then filed an application under Clause 6 of the KLU Order before the Revenue Divisional Officer, which was rejected as per Exhibit P8 for reason of the Circular at Exhibit P9. Exhibit P9 Circular has been set aside in Shivadasan. In the above circumstances, the RDO shall re-consider the application under Clause 6 of the KLU Order in accordance with the directions/declaration in Shivadasan, after getting a report from the Local Level Monitoring Committee [for brevity "LLMC"] as to whether the property is included and if included, the exact description as available from the data bank; to facilitate which Exhibit P8 is set aside. The same shall be done within a period of two months. W.P.(C) No.20419 of 2017
5. The petitioners, who are joint owners, are concerned with 9.94 Ares of property in Re-survey No.142/4 of Nellikode Village, Kozhikode Corporation. The petitioners were earlier before this Court challenging the rejection of of the building permit, in which Exhibit P1 judgment was passed; wherein the petitioners were directed to file an application under Clause 6 of the KLU Order, since the land was not WP(C) No.10538 of 2017 & - 5 - connected cases included in the data bank and only the revenue records showed the description of the property as "nilam". The petitioners then approached the Revenue Divisional Officer; by Exhibit P2, an application under Clause 6 of the KLU Order. This was rejected by Exhibit P3 on the basis of Exhibit P6 Circular. Exhibit P6 Circular has been set aside in Shivadasan. In such circumstances, the RDO shall re-consider Exhibit P2 application under Clause 6 of the KLU Order in accordance with the directions/declaration in Shivadasan, after getting a report from the Local Level Monitoring Committee [for brevity "LLMC"] as to whether the property is included and if included, the exact description as available from the data bank; to facilitate which Exhibit P3 is set aside. The same shall be done within a period of two months. W.P.(C) No.21215 of 2017
6. The petitioner is concerned with a total extent of 32.98 Ares of property in Survey Nos.113/4-1 (7.69 Ares), 113/4-3 (12.46 Ares) 113/4-4 (1.62 Ares), 113/4-5 (2.02 Ares) 113/4-6 (3.69 Ares) 113/6-2 (4.49 Ares) and 113.6-3 (1.01 Ares) in Block No.143 of Edappally North Village, Kanayannur Taluk. According to the petitioner, when they purchased the property it was lying in a developed stage. The surrounding properties are already developed and there have WP(C) No.10538 of 2017 & - 6 - connected cases been put up various types of buildings, including high rise residential apartments. The petitioner intends to set up a multi-storied residential apartment project in the subject land. The petitioner approached the Revenue Divisional Officer with an application at Exhibit P7, for conversion of user. By Exhibit P8 judgment, this Court directed consideration of the Clause 6 application after calling for a report from the Local Level Monitoring Committee (LLMC) and Kerala State Remote Sensing and Environment Center (KSREC). Exhibit P9 is the rejection based on Exhibit P11 Circular. Exhibit P11 Circular has been set aside in Shivadasan. In such circumstances, the RDO shall re-consider Exhibit P7 application under Clause 6 of the KLU Order in accordance with the directions/declaration in Shivadasan, on the basis of the reports received from the Local Level Monitoring Committee [for brevity "LLMC"] and Kerala State Remote Sensing and Environment Center (KSREC) as indicated in Exhibit P8 judgment; to facilitate which Exhibit P9 is set aside. The same shall be done within a period of two months.
W.P.(C) No.21288 of 2017
7. The petitioner is the absolute owner in possession of 11.54 Ares of land comprised in Survey No.531/2 of East Chalakudy WP(C) No.10538 of 2017 & - 7 - connected cases Village. According to the petitioner, the said property is a paramba, which is situated in the heart of Chalakudy Town. The application submitted by the petitioner for a permit to construct a commercial building was rejected by the Municipality; upon which the petitioner was before this Court and this Court by judgment in W.P(C) No.26709 of 2013 directed the owner of the land to approach the authorities under Clause 6 of the KLU Order. The petitioner's application under Clause 6, Exhibit P2, was rejected by Exhibit P12 order based on Exhibit P8 Circular. Exhibit P8 Circular has been set aside in Shivadasan. In the above circumstances, the RDO shall re-consider the application under Clause 6 of the KLU Order in accordance with the directions/declaration in Shivadasan, after getting a report from the Local Level Monitoring Committee [for brevity "LLMC"] as to whether the property is included and if included, the exact description as available from the data bank; to facilitate which Exhibit P12 is set aside. The same shall be done within a period of two months. W.P.(C) No.21908 of 2017
8. The petitioner is in possession of 84.17 Ares of property comprised in Survey Nos.88/2 and 89/1-2-8 of Puthenvelikkara Village in Ernakulam District. The said property is included in the data bank as WP(C) No.10538 of 2017 & - 8 - connected cases "converted land". Exhibit P3 is the application filed under Clause 6 of the KLU Order, before the District Collector. Petitioner had approached this Court for an order for expeditious disposal of the said application and on the basis of Exhibit P4 judgment, consideration was made and Exhibit P5 order was issued rejecting the application citing Exhibit P6 Circular. Exhibit P6 Circular has been set aside in Shivadasan. In such circumstance, the District Collector shall re-consider the application under Clause 6 of the KLU Order in accordance with the directions/declaration in Shivadasan, after getting a report from the Local Level Monitoring Committee [for brevity "LLMC"] as to whether the property is included and if included, the exact description as available from the data bank; to facilitate which Exhibit P5 is set aside. The same shall be done within a period of two months. W.P.(C) No.23006 of 2017
9. The petitioner, along with one Khalid, is concerned with 10.15 Ares of property comprised in Survey No.103/6 of Kattiparuthi Village of Tirur Taluk. According to the petitioner, the property is a reclaimed land in a commercial area and not included in the data bank. The petitioner approached the Revenue Divisional Officer with an application at Exhibit P5, for conversion of user. This Court, by WP(C) No.10538 of 2017 & - 9 - connected cases Exhibit P6 judgment, directed consideration of the Clause 6 application after calling for a report from the Local Level Monitoring Committee (LLMC) and Kerala State Remote Sensing and Environment Center (KSREC). After obtaining the reports from the authorities concerned, the RDO considered the matter and rejected the application by Exhibit P9 order, based on Exhibit P10 Circular. Exhibit P10 Circular has been set aside in Shivadasan. In such circumstances, the RDO shall re-consider Exhibit P5 application under Clause 6 of the KLU Order in accordance with the directions/declaration in Shivadasan, on the basis of the reports received from the Local Level Monitoring Committee [for brevity "LLMC"] and Kerala State Remote Sensing and Environment Center (KSREC) as indicated in Exhibit P9; to facilitate which Exhibit P9 is set aside. The same shall be done within a period of two months.
W.P.(C) No.23183 of 2017
10. The petitioners are the absolute owners in possession of 14.40 Ares of property, comprised in Survey No.677/10 and 677/10-3 of Karthikappally Village in Karthikappally Taluk. According to the petitioners, the property is lying as a garden land for the past several years and there are several buildings surrounding the said WP(C) No.10538 of 2017 & - 10 - connected cases property. It is averred in the writ petition that though proceedings were initiated against the petitioner under the Paddy Land Act, the same was dropped by the authorities finding that the property is lying as a garden land and there are many old coconut and other trees standing there; which is evidenced at Exhibit P2. Since the local authority refused to accept the application for building permit on the ground that the property is described as "nilam" in the revenue records, the petitioner filed Exhibit P5 application before the District Collector under Clause 6 of the KLU Order. The same was considered by the Revenue Divisional Officer and granted conversion of user only to an extent of 10 cents based on the Circular at Exhibit P10. Exhibit P10 Circular has been set aside in Shivadasan. In such circumstances, the RDO shall re-consider Exhibit P5 application under Clause 6 of the KLU Order in accordance with the directions/declaration in Shivadasan, after getting a report from the Local Level Monitoring Committee [for brevity "LLMC"] as to whether the property is included and if included, the exact description as available from the data bank; to facilitate which Exhibit P9 is set aside. The same shall be done within a period of two months.
WP(C) No.10538 of 2017 & - 11 - connected cases
11. In all these above writ petitions, it is further ordered that after obtaining conversion of user, the respective petitioners could approach the land tax authorities for fresh assessment of the land as garden land, upon which the categorisation would also be changed in the BTR as garden land, going by the Division Bench decision in Kizhakkambalam Grama Panchayath V. Mariumma [2015 (2) KLT 516].
The writ petitions are ordered accordingly. Parties are left to suffer their respective costs.
Sd/-
K.Vinod Chandran
vku/- Judge.
[ true copy ]