Revenue
Divisional Officer, Palakkad in accordance to the Kerala
Land Utilization (KLU) Order. In the light of the same, the
respondents erred in including ... petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.
4. Admittedly, there is a KLU order as evident by
Ext.P4., which covers the property in question
Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967
[for short, 'the KLU order'] and to grant permission to the
petitioner to use her property ... existence before 04.07.1967, the date of
coming into force of the KLU order.
3. The petitioner would contend that the above factual
position conclusively shows
bearing trees are absent. It was also
submitted that, even though the KLU order was issued by
the Revenue Divisional Officer, further proceedings have ... statutory powers
vested upon him by virtue of clause 6 of the KLU Order, the
property could not have been included in the Data Bank
necessary documents on
the strength of the Exts.P2 to P6 KLU orders. It is submitted
that, though the authorities convinced the fact that ... matter is to
be reconsidered by the authority especially because there are
KLU orders as evident by Exts.P2 to P6. In Tahsildar
applications submitted by the petitioner seeking exemption under
the KLU order, and other prayers in the writ petitions were left open.
Pursuant to the direction ... revenue
village from the ambit of KLU order 1967 which has been allowed as
per Ext.P16. Petitioner would contend that this
Kalu @ Klu Prajapati vs The Additional Commissioner on 21 February, 2025
Author: Maninder S. Bhatti
Bench: Maninder S. Bhatti
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
user of
land under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order (for short "KLU
order"), and Exts.P3, P4 and P5 reports were obtained ... filed by the petitioner cannot be treated as a petition
under the KLU order. Aggrieved by the same, this writ
petition is filed.
3. Heard
under Clause 6(2) of the Kerala
Land Utilisation Order (in short KLU Order), 1967.
3. For the expeditious disposal of the application, the
petitioners ... respondent for considering the application under Clause 6(2)
of the KLU Order, 1967. For that purpose, the 5 th respondent
conducted an inspection
permission, in
accordance with the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967
(hereinafter "KLU Order"), before the provision came into effect.
8. Under Rule ... Paddy Land
Act, by obtaining orders under Clause 6(2) of the KLU Order,
were liable to pay only 25% of the prescribed fee. However
respondent RDO
on the application seeking permission under the KLU order and
rejected by Ext.P9.
3. Petitioner submits that decision ... paddy land till 2013, and not suitable for cultivation and
therefore KLU permission cannot be granted.
5. In WP(C) No.19047 of 2021 also
