The petitioner approached this Court alleging illegal reclamation of the paddy land by the 4th respondent. The petitioner submits that the 4th respondent is attempting to reclaim the paddy land in violation of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008 (for short, the “Act 28 of 2008”). Ext.P2 is the complaint before the second respondent and Ext.P4 is the complaint before the third respondent. The petitioner submits that the property in Survey Nos.932/1 and 931/2 is classified as 'Nilam' in the draft data bank and therefore, the 4th respondent cannot undertake any construction.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent submits that the property is not classified as 'Nilam' or 'wet land' as on the date of the enactment of the Act W.P.(C) No.23272 of 2013 2 28 of 2008. The property is recorded as converted land in the draft data bank. The 4th respondent submits that they have already applied for development permit before the Panchayath.
In the facts and circumstances as above, the Panchayath shall hear the petitioner and the fourth respondent while considering the application for development permit after adverting to the status of the property in the draft data bank as paddy or wetand. If the property is not covered under the draft data bank, the 4th respondent is free to undertake any construction, provided the 4th respondent shall obtain a permission from the Collector in terms of Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order. The 4th respondent, therefore, at liberty to approach the District Collector, Thrissur in terms of Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order that this is a reclaimed land in the draft data bank.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE ln