Kerala High Court
Muhammed Mayan vs The State Of Kerala on 5 December, 2019
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 / 14TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941
WP(C).No.33110 OF 2019(K)
PETITIONERS:
1 MUHAMMED MAYAN
AGED 63 YEARS
S/O. LATE AYAMMUDU HAJI, PANANGATTU HOUSE, P. O.
PATTAR KADAVU, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676 519.
2 KUNDUPUZHAKKAL KHADEEJA
AGED 49 YEARS
W/O.MUHAMMED MAYAN, PANANGATTU HOUSE, P. O. PATTAR
KADAVU, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676 519.
3 NAHLA NAHAN
AGED 21 YEARS
D/O.MUHAMMED MAYAN, PANANGATTU HOUSE, P. O. PATTAR
KADAVU, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676 519.
BY ADVS.
SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN
SRI.T.K.SAIDALIKUTTY
SRI.LAL K.JOSEPH
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001.
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
MALAPPURAM, PIN - 600101
3 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679 322.
4 THE TAHASILDAR
PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679 322.
5 THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER (R. S.)
INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD., KOZHIKODE DIVISIONAL
OFFICE, 2ND FLOOR, P.M.K. TOWERS, CIVIL STATION POST,
WAYANAD ROAD, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673020.
SR.GP.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR;SC M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.12.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.33110 OF 2019 2
JUDGMENT
The petitioners have approached this Court seeking that their application preferred under Section 27A of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 ('the Act' for short) before the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO), with respect to a property, having an extent of 27 cents comprised of in Re.Sy.No.11/3B of Koottilangadi Village, be directed to be taken up and disposed of at the earliest.
2. The petitioners assert that the property in question is not included as a Paddy Land in the Data Bank prepared by the Local Level Monitoring Committee (LLMC) under the provisions of the Act and that it is a garden land remaining as such for the last several years, if not for decades. The petitioners, therefore, assert that the RDO is now enjoined to consider their application at the earliest and prays that the said authority be directed to do so within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
3. The learned Government Pleader WP(C).No.33110 OF 2019 3 appearing on behalf of the official respondents submits that if Exhibit P8 application is still pending before the RDO, then there is no legal impediment in the same being taken up and considered in terms of law; however, praying that this Court make no affirmative declaration on the entitlement of the petitioners to any relief as sought for by them in the said application and leave it to the said Authority to take an apposite decision in terms of law.
4. In the afore circumstances and since it is without doubt that Exhibit P8 application of the petitioners can be considered only by the RDO, going by the provisions of Section 27A of the Act, I deem it appropriate to order this writ petition, directing the said authority to do so, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
Consequently, I order this writ petition and direct 3rd respondent - RDO to take up Exhibit P8 application of the petitioners and dispose of the same, after affording an opportunity of being heard to WP(C).No.33110 OF 2019 4 them and following due procedure - including by making necessary site inspections, as expeditiously as possible, but not later than three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
I clarify that I have not considered the merits of the contentions impelled by the petitioners in this case nor their entitlement to any of the reliefs sought for in Exhibit P8 application and that it will be up to the RDO to take an apposite decision on it implicitly following the applicable Statutes, Rules and Regulations and after carefully ensuring that the property in question is not included in the Data Bank as a Paddy Land, as has been asserted by the petitioners.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE MC/7.12.19 WP(C).No.33110 OF 2019 5 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE BEARING NO.K.DIS.18683/02/E1 DATED 21.6.2002.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 17.7.2002. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE DEED OF LEASE DATED 7.11.2002.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED DATED 15.7.2016.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 21.4.2018 IN W.P.(C) 14407/2018.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.K.DIS.468/18 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE GIFT DEED DATED 19.10.2017.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 10.7.2019.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:
NIL MC (TRUE COPY) PA TO JUDGE