K.P.Davis v. The Revenue Divisional Officer
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE FRIDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015/3RD ASWINA, 1937 WP(C).No. 21145 of 2015 (P) ---------------------------- PETITIONER:
------------------- K.P. DAVIS, S/O.KOCHU PAILO, AGED 35 YEARS, KAVALAKKATTU HOUSE, VADAMA P.O., MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN- 680 736.
BY ADVS.SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN, SMT.P.G.BABITHA.
RESPONDENTS:
-----------------------
1. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, THRISSUR -680 001.
2. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, IRINJALAKKUDA -680 121.
3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VILLAGE OFFICE, IRINJALAKKUDA- 680 121.
BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.THOMAS JOHN AMBOOKEN.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25-09-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
rs.
WP(C).No. 21145 of 2015 (P) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- P1:- TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO. 636/2007 OF S.R.O. IRINJALAKUDA. P2:- TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DTD. 01/09/2014 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
P3:- TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DTD. 11/05/2010 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
P4:- TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE IST RESPONDENT NO. K DIS 20048/2010/B2 DTD. 24/08/2011.
P5:- TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE DATE BANK. P6:- TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 24/05/2015. P7:- TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 30/06/2015 IN WP(C).NO.17204/2015. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.
//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs.
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.
***************************************************************************** W.P.(C) No.21145 of 2015 ****************************************************************************** Dated this the 25th day of September, 2015
JUDGMENT
The petitioner approached the first respondent under Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967(for short, the Order). 2.
The petitioner's case is that his land is a converted land much before the enactment of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008 (for short, the "Act 28/2008"). In view of the claim of the petitioner, the case shall be considered under Clause 6 of the Order by the first respondent, after verifying the draft data bank to find out whether the property of the petitioner is a paddy or wet land under the Act 28/2008. If the land is not classified as above, necessarily, the application of the petitioner shall be considered under Clause 6 of the Order for utilizing other purpose. Needful shall be done within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment after issuing notice to the petitioner.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE ln