The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition challenging Ext.P4 proceedings of the second respondent rejecting her application for permission to construct a commercial building in her property. Her application has been rejected for the reason that property is described as 'nilam' in the Revenue Records produced by the petitioner. 2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the ground on which Ext.P4 has been issued is unsustainable. The case of the petitioner is that though the property has been described as 'nilam' in the Revenue Records, at present the same is remaining as a house plot or a filled up land. The above is evident from Ext.P1 photograph. The land has been described as reclaimed land in the Data Bank, Exhibit P3. Therefore,she seeks the issue of appropriate orders setting aside Ext.P4.
W.P.(C) No.25617 of 2014-B -:2:-
3. Advocate C.K.Vidyasagar appears for the respondents.
4. Having considered the rival contentions of the contesting parties, it has to be held that Ext.P4 is unsustainable in view of the dictum laid down by this court in Shahanaz Shukkoor v. Chelannur Grama Panchayat [2009(3) KLT 899] and Praveen v. Land Revenue Commissioner, [2010(2) KLT 617]. It has been held by this Court that it is not the description of a land in the Revenue records that is decisive, but the present condition of the land. If the land has ceased to be a paddy field on the date of coming into force of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008, the building permit cannot be denied. A perusal of Ext.P4 shows that the above aspect has not been considered. In Exhibit P3 Data Bank also, the petitioner's property is described as reclaimed land. Therefore, Ext.P4 is set aside.
This Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of directing W.P.(C) No.25617 of 2014-B -:3:-
the second respondent to consider the application submitted by the petitioner afresh, after conducting an inspection of the land of the petitioner to verify whether the land continues to be a paddy field as described in the Revenue Records of the petitioner and whether the conversion was made before 2008 and thereafter, to pass appropriate orders on the application in accordance with law. Appropriate orders as indicated above shall be passed, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of one month of the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE kkj