Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Kerala
  4. /
  5. 2014
  6. /
  7. January

Smt.Geetha vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala|03 December, 2014
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

The petitioners are the owners and in possession of the property in RS No.503/1 of Kunnamangalam amsom and desom of Kozhikode Taluk.. The petitioners obtained a permit for constructing a residential building. Ext.P4 is the permit. The petitioners submitted that the property is dry land. However, by Ext.P6 order of the District Collector under Section 13 of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Lands and Wet Land Act 2008, the petitioners have been directed to remove the constructions already made in the property.It is challenging the above order, the petitioner filed this writ petition. 2. In this matter, a counter affidavit has been filed by the 2nd respondent-District Collector. It is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that the property is classified as wet land. The relevant entry in the Draft Data Bank is also produced along with the counter affidavit. The 5th respondent, who filed a complaint against the construction undertaken by the petitioners, also filed a detailed counter affidavit. It is submitted by the 5th respondent that the petitioners' property is wet land and without obtaining necessary permission, the petitioners have undertaken the construction.
3. According to the petitioners, even though the property is classified as wet land in BTR, the property was reclaimed long before the Act 28 of 2008. I am of the view that the petitioners' remedy is to approach the Local Level Monitoring Committee to correct the entry regarding their property in the Draft Data Bank. If the petitioners approach the Local Level Monitoring Committee, a site inspection shall be conducted by the Committee, in the presence of the petitioners and the 5th respondent and after adverting to the rival contentions and also ascertaining whether this property can be classified as wet land in the Draft Data Bank, necessary orders shall be passed. If it can not be classified as wet land, necessary corresponding changes shall be effected in the Draft Data Bank.
4. Depending upon the decision of the Local Level Monitoring Committee, the petitioners can undertake construction based on the permit issued by the Panchayat. However, it is made clear that if the Local Level Monitoring Committee affirms the view taken by the District Collector that the petitioners property is wet land, no construction can be undertaken by the petitioners based on the permit. It is left to the District Collector to enforce Ext.P6 based on the decision of the Local Level Monitoring Committee. Needful shall be done within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till then, status quo shall be maintained.
The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, Judge.
dpk /True copy/ PS to Judge.
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Smt.Geetha vs State Of Kerala

Court

High Court Of Kerala

JudgmentDate
03 December, 2014
Judges
  • A Muhamed Mustaque
Advocates
  • Sri