V.E.Noushad vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Feb 01, 2024

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1298669

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1298669
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Decided On: Feb 01, 2024
Case Number: WP(C)/14814/2013

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

V.E.Noushad

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....the 2nd respondent declined the request as per the impugned order. aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed.2. heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned government pleader.3. this court perused ext.p12 order. inext.p12 order, the 2nd respondent found that the property is a water logged area and near to marine drive. according to the agricultural officer, the property is shown as 'nilam' in the data bank. the 2nd respondent found that, since in the data bank, it is mentioned as 'thanneerthadam', reclamation can not be granted. the 2nd respondent found that, even though in the data bank it is shown as 'nilam', it is a water logged area which is to be protected. after relying on section 3(1) of the kerala conservation of paddy land and wet land act, 2008, the 2nd respondent found that the request of the petitioners can not be allowed. i see no reason to interfere with ext.p12 order. the 2 nd respondent considered the matter in detail and thereafter passed ext.p12 order. therefore, i am of the considered opinion that there is no merit in this writ petition. accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. sd/- p.v.kunhikrishnan dm judge appendix of wp(c) 14814/2013 petitioner exhibitsexhibit p1. true copy of the representation filed by the petitioner before the district collector, ernakulam dated exhibit p2. true copy of the report to the tahsildar, kanayannoor, on mulavukad. exhibit p3. true copy of the addtional tahsildar, dated exhibit p4. true copy of the report of the rdo, fortcochin dated exhibit p5. true copy of the resolution passed by the mulavukad grama panchayath dated 16/11/2007. exhibit p6. true copy of the decision of the local level monitering committee dated exhibit p7. true copy of the report of the agricultural officer, krishi bhavan, mulavukad dated 2/6/2010. exhibit p8. true copy of the no objection certificate datedtrust. exhibit p9. true copy of the request to the 2nd.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 12TH MAGHA, 1945 PETITIONERS: 1 V.E.NOUSHAD AGED 61 YEARS S/O.ISMAIL, RESIDING AT VALIYAVEETTIL HOUSE, CHERUPARAMBATHU ROAD, KADAVANTHRA, KOCHI-20. 2 K.E.SUHARA W/O.V.E.NOUSHAD, RESIDING AT VALIYAVEETTIL HOUSE, CHERUPARAMBATHU ROAD, KADAVANTHRA, KOCHI-20. BY ADVS. SRI.T.KRISHNAN UNNI (SR.) SRI.K.C.KIRAN SMT.MEENA.A. SRI.SAJU.S.A SMT.P.A.SHEEJA RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO AGRICULTURE (NCA) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2 THE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTRION COMMISSIONER AGRICULTURE (NCA) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR ERNAKULAM-682 030. 4 THE TAHSILDAR ERNAKLAM-682 011. 5 THE VILLAGE OFFIER MULAVUKAD, ERNAKLAM DISTRICT-682 504. 6 THE PRINCIPAL AGRICULTURAL OFFICER ERNAKULAM-682 030. BY ADV.
SRI.B.S.SYAMANTAK, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
------------------------------ W.P.(C)No. 14814 of 2013 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 01st day of February, 2024

JUDGMENT

Petitioners are owners and they are in possession of 3.97.67 hectares of land in R.S. 6/5, 7 Part and 8 Part of Mulavukad Village. According to the petitioners, the said area lies as a single plot. It is the further case of the petitioners that, from the above said plot an extent of 60.15 Ares was acquired for construction of the 4 line road connecting Vallarpadam Terminal with Kalamassery. It is the definite case of the petitioners that the road constructed passes through the middle of the property of the petitioners virtually dividing the property into 2 plots. After the construction of the road, the property cannot be used for prawn cultivation for which it was originally used is the submission. That apart, during construction of the road the plot has become partially filled up and reclaimed is the further submission. In such circumstances, the petitioners filed a representation before the District Collector seeking permission to reclaim the land. It is the case of the petitioners that, all the authorities had recommended for granting permission to the petitioners to reclaim. Since the 2nd respondent did not take any action on the request of the petitioners, they moved this Court by filing W.P. (C) No. 2668/2013. The said writ petition was disposed of by this Court directing the 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of the request. Thereafter the 2nd respondent declined the request as per the impugned order. Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader.

3. This Court perused Ext.P12 order. In

Ext.P12 order, the 2nd respondent found that the property is a water logged area and near to Marine Drive. According to the Agricultural officer, the property is shown as 'nilam' in the Data Bank. The 2nd respondent found that, since in the Data Bank, it is mentioned as 'thanneerthadam', reclamation can not be granted. The 2nd respondent found that, even though in the Data Bank it is shown as 'nilam', it is a water logged area which is to be protected. After relying on Section 3(1) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008, the 2nd respondent found that the request of the petitioners can not be allowed. I see no reason to interfere with Ext.P12 order. The 2 nd respondent considered the matter in detail and thereafter passed Ext.P12 order. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that there is no merit in this writ petition. Accordingly, this Writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN DM JUDGE APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14814/2013 PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM DATED EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT TO THE TAHSILDAR, KANAYANNOOR, ON MULAVUKAD. EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF THE ADDTIONAL TAHSILDAR, DATED EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE RDO, FORTCOCHIN DATED EXHIBIT P5. TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION PASSED BY THE MULAVUKAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH DATED 16/11/2007. EXHIBIT P6. TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITERING COMMITTEE DATED EXHIBIT P7. TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN, MULAVUKAD DATED 2/6/2010. EXHIBIT P8. TRUE COPY OF THE NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE DATED

TRUST. EXHIBIT P9. TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTED EXHIBIT P10. TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION FROM PRINIPAL AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, ERNAKLAM TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 26/7/2012. EXHIBIT P11. TRUE COPY OF THE

JUDGMENT DATED 26/2/2013 IN WPC

NO.268/2013./

EXHIBIT P12. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER

DATED 4/5/2013 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2024 Same Parties V.E.Noushad vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice P.V.Kunhikrishnan