Petitioners have challenged the resolution passed by the Panchayat proposing to construct a bus stand in an extent of 49 cents of land in Sy. Nos. 373/3, 373/4, 373/5, 373/6, 173/7, 373/8, 372/1 and 259/5. The land was offered by five persons including the 6th respondent. According to the petitioners, the land involved in the above resolution has been mentioned as Nilam in the Basic Tax Register and therefore the Panchayat cannot reclaim the same for the purpose of constructing a bus stand without resorting to remedy under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and the Rules framed thereunder. That apart, it is contended that in order to construct a bus stand or a halting place for buses, the Panchayart has to obtain permission from the Regional Transport Authority. It is lacking in this case. Reference is made to the proviso to Section 227 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, which reads as under: “227. Public landing places and cart-stands etc:- Subject to such rules as may be prescribed, the Village Panchayat may-
(a) provide public landing places, halting places and cart-stands (including stands for animals and vehicles of any description) and levy fees for their use; and
(b) where any such place or stand has been provided, prohibit the use for the same purpose by any person, within such distance, thereof, any public place or the side of any public road as the panchayat may, subject to the control of the Regional Transport Authority, specify:
Provided that the previous sanction of the Regional Transport Authority shall be obtained before any stand or halting place for motor vehicles is opened.”
The learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that construction of the bus stand is again illegal on account of the failure to comply with Rule 334 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules. Therefore, the resolution, which is produced as Ext. P4 in W.P(C) No. 24894/2013 is illegal on account of the infirmities pointed out above.
2. Counter affidavit is filed by respondents 3, 5 and 6. It is inter alia contended that this property is not included in the data bank particulars as it has been filled long back, ie, in the year 2000 and therefore the provisions of the Act have no application, It is therefore open for the respondent Panchayat to proceed with the construction of the bus stand.
Reference is also made to Ext. R5(e) report of the Agricultural Officer as well as the Village Officer, which apparently indicates that the land in question is not included in the data bank entry. However, it is indicated that the land is given free of cost to the Panchayat for construction of bus stand, which is presently situated in a congested area and re- construction of the bus stand and re-location are required and the same is for a public purpose, which cannot be scuttled by the aforesaid litigation. Since the owners of the land are giving the property free of cost to the Panchayat, they are free to construct a commercial complex as well.
3. In the statement filed by the 3rd respondent, it is inter alia indicated that the above property was filled up in the year 2000 and until then, there was paddy cultivation in the area. It is also indicated that no permission was obtained for converting the land under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967.
4. Having regard to the above factual situation, it is clear that this property is not included as paddy land or wet land in the data bank particulars presently available and therefore prima facie it is not possible to come to the conclusion that the Act applies to the land in question. However, in the Basic Tax Register, the property is described as Nilam and even according to the 3rd respondent, it was filled up in the year 2000 and no permission has been obtained from the Collector for conversion of the said Nilam. In fact, if any food crop is cultivated in the land for a continuous period of three years as mentioned in the Kerala Land Utilisation Order (for short KLUO), to effect conversion, owners of the land ought to have obtained necessary permission. Failure to do so will entail the authorities to take appropriate action in accordance with the procedure prescribed. It is therefore incumbent on the Panchayat to seek necessary approval from the competent authority under the KLUO as well before proceeding with the construction in said property. That apart, so far there is no material to indicate that necessary permission had been obtained from the Motor Vehicles Department to enable the Panchayat to proceed with the construction of bus stand. Under these circumstances, I am of the view that these writ petitions can be disposed of as under:
(1) The Panchayat shall proceed with the construction only after complying with the procedure prescribed under Rule 227 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act and Section 334 of the Motor Vehicle Rules.
(2) The Panchayat shall also obtain necessary permission for converting the land from the competent authority under the KLUO before proceeding with any construction.
Sd/- A.M. Shaffique, Judge.
Tds/