Kerala High Court
Rison C.J vs Local Level Monitoring Committee on 18 March, 2020
Author: Alexander Thomas
Bench: Alexander Thomas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1941
WP(C).No.21398 OF 2018(Y)
PETITIONER:
RISON C.J
AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.C.K.JOSE, CHONEDAN HOUSE,
MURIYAD P.O, PAREKATTUKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT,
PIN-680683.
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.K.ASHKAR
SMT.ASHIRA MOHAMED ASHROF
RESPONDENTS:
1 LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE,
(UNDER KERALA CONSERVATION OF PADDY LAND AND WETLAND
ACT, 2008), MURIYAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT,REPRESENTED BY ITS
CONVENER, AGRICULTURE OFFICER,KRISHI BHAVAN, MURIYAD,
THRISSUR DISTRICT,PIN-680683.
2 THE AGRICULTURE OFFICER
KRISHI BHAVAN, MURIYAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT,
PIN-680683.
3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
MURIYAD VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT,
PIN-680683.
4 MURIYAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT
MURIYAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680683,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
5 DISTRICT LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE
THRISSUR (UNDER KERALA CONSERVATION OF PADDY LAND AND
WETLAND ACT, 2008), COLLECTORATE,
THRISSUR-680001,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENOR, REVENUE DIVISIONAL
OFFICER,THRISSUR.
W.P(C). No. 21398 of 2018
2
6 ADDL.R6- THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
COLLECTORATE, THRISSUR, PIN-680003(ADDL.R6
IMPLERADED AS PER ORDER DATED 5.3.2019 IN
IA.NO.1/2019 IN WP(C)21398/2018)
R4 BY ADVS.
SMT.REENA P.R.
SRI.JESTIN MATHEW, GOVT.PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMIS-
SION ON 18.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.P(C). No. 21398 of 2018
3
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
------------------------------------
W.P(C). No. 21398 of 2018
------------------------------------
Dated this the 18th day of March, 2020
JUDGMENT
The case set up in this writ petition (C) is as follows:
The petitioner is the resident of Muriyad Grama Panchayat in Ward No.IV. He owns 9.5 cents of property comprised in Sy.No.148 of Muriyad village at Parekattukara. Since the nature of the property was described in revenue records, the same was included in the databank of Muriyad Grama Panchayat under Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008. He got derived title to the property by the settlement deed executed by his parents. Petitioner's parents bought the property in 1980 and the same was actually garden land at the time of its purchase and cultivated with coconut trees, orchards and plantains. Ext.P14 and P15 google earth images and Ext.P13 and P18 photographs proves the same. Petitioner made Ext.P4 application for construction of residential building in the land as per the provision of Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act and rules made thereunder. The 1 st respondent Local Level Monitoring Committee arbitrarily rejected the same without W.P(C). No. 21398 of 2018 4 getting and considering the reports of the respondents 2 and 3 with respect to the matters described under section 9(8) of the Act. It rejected the application on an unfounded ground that the property is surrounded by large tract of Paddy fields, namely 'Mutherichira' which actually lies now where near to the petitioner's property and which situates on 1.2-1.5 Km far from petitioner's property across the road abutting to petitioner's property. In Ext.P17 Mahasar report regarding the similar application of the adjacent property lies adjoining to the southern boundary of the petitioner's property; Respondents 2 to 4 has stated that it is not surrounded by paddy fields and not suitable for paddy cultivation. Ext.P11 decision of the 1st respondent rejecting Ext.P4 application of the petitioner is vitiated by arbitrariness.
2. Heard Sri.K.K.Ashkar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent Nos.1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 and Smt.P.R.Reena, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.4 (Muriyad Grama Panchayat)
3. The petitioner would point out that he has submitted Ext.P4 W.P(C). No. 21398 of 2018 5 application dated 05-01-2018 for construction of residential building in 9.5 cents of land within the limits of the 4 th respondent Muriyad Grama Panchayat. The complaint of the petitioner is that in gross violation of the prescribed procedure, the 1st respondent Local Level Monitoring Committee has issued Ext.P11 proceedings deciding not to make recommendations in favour of the petitioner to the 5 th respondent District Level Monitoring Committee for such permission.
4. The petitioner would point out that Rule 5 would mandate that in such cases, the respondent Local Level Monitoring Committee is bound to get a report from the Village Officer and Agricultural officer concerned and that no such reports have been obtained and further that the Local Level Monitoring Committee has not also conducting the inspection on the subject property and it is without compliance of these procedural formalities that the impugned Ext.P11 decision has been taken.
5. Taking note of these aspects it is only to be held that the impugned decision rendered by the 1st respondent as per Ext.P11, without getting reports of the Village Officer or Agricultural Officer concerned as well as without conducting any inspection, is illegal and W.P(C). No. 21398 of 2018 6 improper. Accordingly, the impugned decision as per Ext.P11 will stand set aside and Ext.P4 application will stand remitted to the 1 st respondent Local Level Monitoring Committee for consideration afresh. The 1st respondent will ensure that the 3 rd respondent Village Officer as well as the 2nd respondent Agricultural Officer will conduct separate inspection with due prior notice to the petitioner and will also furnish their separate reports in the matter and copies of the said reports of the 3rd respondent and the 2nd respondent should also be furnished to the petitioner in advance.
6. Thereafter the 1st respondent may conduct appropriate inspection on subject property with due prior notice to the petitioner and copies of the inspection report in that regard should also be given to the petitioner in advance and thereafter the 1 st respondent will afford reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner through authorised representative or counsel if any, and should render an appropriate decision as to the recommendations, which has to make to the 5th respondent District Level Monitoring Committee on the request of the petitioner for permission has sought for in Ext.P4. The entire formalities in this regard should be duly communicated by the 1st respondent within two months from the W.P(C). No. 21398 of 2018 7 date of production of the certified copy of this judgment. Thereafter the recommendations of the 1st respondent shall be placed before the 5th respondent District Level Monitoring Committee, who should take the final decision on the application of the petitioner as per Ext.P4, after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner without much delay preferably within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the recommendation from the 1 st respondent Local Level Monitoring Committee.
With these observations and directions the above Writ Petition (Civil) will stand finally disposed of.
Sd/-
ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE KAS W.P(C). No. 21398 of 2018 8 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED NO.2383/2017 DATED 22.11.2017 OF KALLETUNKARA SUB REGISTRY.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 03.01.2018 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT VILLAGE OFFICER TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 03.01.2018 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT VILLAGE OFFICER TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR CONSTRUCTION OF RESIDENTIAL BUILDING IN PETITIONER'S PROPERTY CONTAINED IN THE DATABANK DATED 05.01.2018 MADE BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT DATED 05.01.2018 MADE BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE DATED 03.01.2018 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF LOCATION CERTIFICATE DATED 03.01.2018 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF LOCATION SKETCH DATED 03.01.2018 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE RTI REQUEST DATED 19.02.2018 MADE BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
W.P(C). No. 21398 of 20189 EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY FURNISHED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 13.03.2018 TO EXT.P9 RTI REQUEST.
EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 06.01.2018 EXHIBIT P12 TRUE PRINTOUT OF THE GOOGLE EARTH IMAGE SHOWING MUTHERICHIRA PADDY FIELDS AND PETITIONER'S PROPERTY.
EXHIBIT P13 PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE PRESENT STATUS OF THE PETITIONER'S PROPERTY EXHIBIT P14 TRUE PRINTOUTS OF GOOGLE EARTH IMAGES OF THE PETITIONER'S PROPERTY AS ON 03.03.2016.
EXHIBIT P15 TRUE PRINTOUTS OF GOOGLE EARTH IMAGES OF THE PETITIONER'S PROPERTY AS ON 29.03.2017.
EXHIBIT P16 TRUE COPY OF THE NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE DATED 04.04.2014 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT IN FAVOUR OF ONE MR.UNNIKRISHNAN FOR CONSTRUCTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDING IN LAND COMPRISED IN SY.NO.148 OF MURIAYAD VILLAGE.
EXHIBIT P17 TRUE COPY OF THE MAHASAR REPORT MADE BY THE RESPONDENTS 2 TO 4 WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY MENTIONED IN EXT.P16 EXHIBIT P18 PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE FOUNDATION BUILT AS PER EXT.P14 AND P15 PERMISSION LYING ADJACENT TO PETITIONER'S PROPERTY.
EXHIBIT P19 TRUE COPY OF THE RTI REQUEST DATED 17.03.2018 MADE BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P20 TRUE COPY OF THE INFORMATION FURNISHED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN REPLY TO EXT.P17 ON 12.04.2018 W.P(C). No. 21398 of 2018 10 EXHIBIT P21 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 12-01-2019 RECEIVED FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P22 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR DATED 04-02-2019 ALONG WITH ITS RECEIPT OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE