Kerala High Court
The Nenmanikkara Grama Panchayath vs Sijo Joseph on 19 August, 2015
Bench: Ashok Bhushan, A.M.Shaffique
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALAAT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE
MONDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/3RD PHALGUNA, 1937
WA.No. 28 of 2016 () IN WP(C).23777/2015
------------------------------------------
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 23777/2015 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 19.8.2015
APPELLANT(S)/RESPONDENT:
----------------------------------------------
THE NENMANIKKARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH
PALIYEKKARA, CHITTISSERY P.O., THRISSUR 680 301.
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY.
BY ADVS.SRI.C.HARIKUMAR
SRI.RENJITH RAJAPPAN
SMT.SANU S MALAKEEL
RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER:
--------------------------------------------------
SIJO JOSEPH, AGED 38 YEARS
S/O.JOSEPH, PUTHUPPARA HOUSE, KIDANGOOR P.O.
THURAVOOR VILLAGE, ALUVA 686 572.
R BY SRI.N.ASHOK KUMAR
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22-02-2016, ALONG
WITH WA. 37/2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
sou.
ASHOK BHUSHAN, CJ & A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J
--------------------------------------------------------------
W.A. No. 28 of 2016
and
W.A. No. 37 of 2016
---------------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 22nd day of February, 2016
J U D G M E N T
Shaffique, J These writ appeals have been filed against two separate judgment dated 19.8.2015 in W.P(C) No.23777 of 2015 and W.P(C) No.23776 of 2015. In both the cases, though petitioners have submitted application for issuance of building permit the same came to be rejected by the Panchayat inter alia observing that the property is paddy field ('Nilam') and that grant of building permit is in violation of Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008.
2. Learned Single Judge by the impugned judgment, after referring to various authorities on the point, directed the Panchayat to conduct local inspection of the property regarding the present lie as well as condition of the surrounding properties. The Panchayat was also directed to consider the application and pass positive orders granting building permit W.A.Nos.28 & 37 of 2015 2 after giving an opportunity of being heard if they are satisfied that the land in its present form is not suitable for paddy cultivation.
3. Impugning the aforesaid judgment, the appeals have been filed contending that the Panchayat has no jurisdiction in the matter if the property is described as 'paddy land' in the Data Bank prepared under the 2008 Act or even described as 'Nilam' as per the Revenue Records. In fact this position has been considered by the Supreme Court in Revenue Divisional Officer, Fort Kochi v. Jalaja Dileep [2015 (1) KLT 984 SC] by which the Supreme Court has set aside the judgment of this Court reported in Jalaja Dileep v. Revenue Divisional Officer [2012 (3) KLT 333] observing that if the property is described as paddy land or wet land as defined under the 2008 Act, the petitioner cannot claim any change in the character of the property unless it is permissible under the Act. As far as the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 is concerned, the remedy is to approach the competent authority for change of use.
4. In the present case, such issues were considered by the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge proceeded on the basis that the property was converted long prior to the 2008 Act coming into force.
W.A.Nos.28 & 37 of 2015 3
5. But when the appellant has a case that the property was described as paddy land in the Data Bank prepared by the Local Level Monitoring Committee, the appellant authority will have no jurisdiction to grant building permit unless necessary corrections are made as per law. The learned counsel for writ petitioner/respondent would submit that they intend to seek for regularisation of conversion by remitting the requisite fee as per the present Rules.
6. No doubt, if there is any provision by which the petitioner is entitled to seek regularisation in terms of Kerala Land Utilisation order 1967, it is always open for them to approach the competent authority. If the property is described as paddy land in Data Bank prepared by Local Level Monitoring Committee they will have to approach such authority for correction, if the Data Bank has not been finalised.
With the above observation, the writ appeals are allowed setting aside the judgment of learned Single Judge, and the writ petitions are dismissed.
Sd/-
ASHOK BHUSHAN CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-
A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE sou.24/2.