Kerala High Court
Unknown vs By Adv.Sri.V.B.Hari Narayanan
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF JULY 2018 / 9TH SRAVANA, 1940
WP(C).No. 5554 of 2013
PETITIONER
PRASANNAN NAIR
S/O.KARUNAKARA KURUP, PERUMATTATHIL, KALLIMEL
SREENILAYAM, KARUVATTA NORTH P.O., ALAPUZHA
DISTRICT-690554.
BY ADV.SRI.V.B.HARI NARAYANAN
RESPONDENTS
1. STATE OF KERALA
REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, AGRICULTURAL
DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM, PIN-695001.
2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-688001.
3. AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
KARUVATTA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-690517.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.R. DHANIL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 31-07-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
mks
WP(C).No. 5554 of 2013
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT-P1-TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 2268/2005
EXHIBIT-P2-TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 14/06/2011 IN W.P(C) 12576/2011
EXHIBIT-P3-TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 05/05/12 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT-P4-TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER
EXHIBIT-P5-TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15/06/2012 ISSUED BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT-P6-TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 09/08/2012 IN W.P(C) 17655/2012
EXHIBIT-P7-TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 07/01/2013 ISSUED BY THE
IST RESPONDENT
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS
/TRUE COPY/
P.A. TO JUDGE
mks
02/08/2018
Devan Ramachandran, J.
-----------------------------------------------
W.P.(C)No.5554 of 2013 T
-----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 31st day of July, 2018
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has filed this writ petition impugning Exhibits P5 and P7 orders issued by the District Collector and Revenue Secretary respectively under the provisions of Section 13 of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 ('the Act' for short), as per which, the petitioner was directed to restore the nature of his property as a paddy field, on the allegation that he has used it for the purpose of fish cultivation.
2. The petitioner's primary and singular assertion is that these orders are illegal because even the Act permit intermediary crops to be cultivated without changing the ecological nature of the paddy land. The petitioner says that the word 'intermediary crops' also WPC 5554/13 2 has been defined in Section 2(ix) of the Act to take in a short term crops, cultivated in between two paddy cultivation periods in an interchangeable manner according to the ecological nature of the paddy land like vegetables, pulses, plantain, fish, etc. The petitioner thus asserts that Exhibits P5 and P7 orders cannot stand scrutiny of law.
3. I have examined Exhibits P5 and P7 orders and I find substantial force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Even going by these orders, the allegation against the petitioner is that he has used the paddy land for the cultivation of short term crops and fish farming. Prima facie, it appears that these activities are protected by Section 3(2) of the Act. I, therefore, do not see any discernible reason for issuance of these orders by the authorities without considering the specific mandate of the Act.
WPC 5554/13 3
4. In such view of the matter, I deem it appropriate to direct the first respondent to re-consider the issue and to take a decision based on the specific mandate of the Act and in particular Sections 3(2) and 2(ix) of the Act. For this purpose, I quash Exhibit P7 order and direct the competent Secretary of Government of Kerala to re- consider the revision preferred by the petitioner against Exhibit P5 order of the District Collector, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and after making all necessary and suitable enquiries, as expeditiously as possible but not later than four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
This writ petition is thus ordered.
Sd/-
Devan Ramachandran, Judge tkv