TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 1353X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . This, therefore, means that, as a result of the above development, Act 28 of 2008 is rendered inapplicable to the lands owned by the respondents. In such a situation, in the light of the principles laid down by the Apex Court in the judgment in Revenue Divisional Officer v. Jalaja Dileep [ 2015 (3) TMI 813 - SUPREME COURT ], automatically the provisions of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 would be applicable. Therefore, if the status of the lands are to be changed in the manner as sought for by the respondents, they will necessarily have to move the authorities under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967. Though it is true that in the judgment of the Apex Court, that principle has been laid down by the Apex Court in the backgr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ees. It is stated that despite that, in the Basic Tax Register, the property has been described as a paddy land. They say that, therefore, they made Ext.P3 representation to the Local Level Monitoring Committee constituted under Section 5 of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008 (Act 28 of 2008), which had published a data bank including the lands in question, requesting to exclude their properties. With these averments, they filed the writ petition seeking a prayer directing the respondents therein to exclude the land from the data bank prepared under Section 5(4)(i) of Act 28 of 2008 and also to require the 3rd respondent therein to correct the entry regarding the description of the land contained in the Basic Tax R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a Dileep's case (supra), the judgment of the learned single Judge is untenable. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents however contended that having regard to the fact that Local Level Monitoring Committee itself has modified the draft data bank, respondents are entitled to have the Basic Tax Register corrected in terms of Section 18 of the Kerala Land Tax Act. 5. We have considered the submissions made. 6. It is true as contended by the learned Government Pleader that the judgment in Jalaja Dileep's case (supra) was reversed by the Apex Court in the judgment mentioned above. In the said judgment, after referring to the provisions of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 and Act 28 of 2008, law has been laid down by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der the Wet Land Act 2008 as a Paddy Land or Wetland and the classification of land is noted as Nilam in revenue records, the provisions of the Act 28/2008 would apply. As noticed earlier, there is ample provision within the Act to grant permission for such land for residential purpose or public purpose as defined in the Act. And as elaborated earlier, if the property is not included in the Data Bank as Paddy Land or Wetland as defined under Act 28/2008, it is still governed by the provisions of K.L.U. Order 1967. Thus, State of Kerala has two statutes- K.L.U. Order 1967 and Kerala Cultivation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act 2008 each dealing with delineated areas with respect to preservation, management and process of reclamation o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the prescribed authority, appellate authority or the revisional authority under the Act. Therefore, the rectification of mistake can only be in respect of proceedings or orders passed by the original authority, appellate authority or the revisional authority. 21. Statutory enquiry to ascertain whether the land is a Paddy Land or Wetland and conversion of the land for residential purpose or for any public purpose is governed by K.L.U. Order or the Kerala Wetland Act, 2008 for conversion of the land from Nilam (Wetland) to 'Purayidam' (Dry Land). The concerned authorities constituted under K.L.U. Order or Kerala Wetland Act 2008 are the competent authority. Nature of the land cannot be changed or converted by directing chan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nk and the entry has been modified into converted land. This, therefore, means that, as a result of the above development, Act 28 of 2008 is rendered inapplicable to the lands owned by the respondents. In such a situation, in the light of the principles laid down by the Apex Court in the judgment mentioned above, automatically the provisions of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 would be applicable. Therefore, if the status of the lands are to be changed in the manner as sought for by the respondents, they will necessarily have to move the authorities under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967. 9. The further issue raised before us by the learned Government Pleader was that in view of the directions of the Apex Court as contained ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
