Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Prasanth Krishnan vs State of Kerala

Prasanth Krishnan vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jul 31, 2023
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1370098

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
WP(C)/20785/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Prasanth Krishnan

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....divisional officer to consider form-6 application dated 16.02.2023 submitted by the petitioner on merits without the petitioner being directed to make any payment in terms of rule 12(9) of the kerala conservation of paddy land and wetland rules, 2008.2. the petitioner states that the petitioner is the owner of1.85 ares of land comprised in re-survey no.21 of edapally north village, kanayannur taluk in ernakulam district. the petitioner purchased the property in the year 2020. the property was included in data bank in terms of the provisions of the kerala conservation of paddy land and wetland act, 2008.3. the petitioner’s property is described as ‘nilam’ inrevenue records. the petitioner filed form-5 application before the 2nd respondent-revenue divisional officer to remove his land from data bank. the 2nd respondent-revenue divisional officer removed his property from data bank on the basis of report submitted by the agricultural officer.4. thereafter, the petitioner submitted form-6 applicationto the 2nd respondent-revenue divisional officer for changing the nature of land in revenue records. a demand for conversion fee has been made by the 2nd respondent-revenue divisional officer. the petitioner has been required to pay an amount of rs.8,14,000/-. the extent of land possessed by the petitioner is less than 25 cents and therefore the petitioner is not legally bound to pay any conversion fee, contends the petitioner.5. i have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned senior government pleader representing the respondents.6. the extent of land possessed by the petitioner is only1.85 ares. the petitioner would submit that in the hands of the predecessor-in-interest of the property also, the extent of land was less than 25 cents. ext.p4 would show that the predecessor-in- interest had less than 25 cents. in view of the circulars of the government of kerala exempting the land holdings below 25 cents from payment of conversion fee,.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH MONDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF JULY 2023 / 9TH SRAVANA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 20785 OF 2023 PETITIONER: PRASANTH KRISHNAN AGED 40 YEARS S/O LATE PRATHAPAN C P, HOUSE NO. 2106, "PRASANTHI”, MULAKAYIL ROAD, ELAMAKKARA P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682 026. BY ADV VISHAK.K.JOHNSON RESPONDENTS:

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, STATE SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001. 2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, FORT KOCHI OFFICE OF THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, FORT KOCHI, FORT KOCHI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682 001. 3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER EDAPPALLY NORTH VILLAGE, VILLAGE OFFICE EDAPPALLY NORTH, PONEKKARA RD, PONEKKARA, EDAPPALLY, KOCHI, KERALA, PIN - 682 024. 4 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER FOR THE COCHIN CORPORATION AGRICULTURE OFFICE, 1ST FLOOR, KOCHI CORPORATION, VYTTILA SHOPPING COMPLEX, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682 019. BY ADV SMT.DEEPA N-SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 31st day of July, 2023 The petitioner is before this Court seeking to quash Ext.P2 and to command the 2nd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer to consider Form-6 application dated 16.02.2023 submitted by the petitioner on merits without the petitioner being directed to make any payment in terms of Rule 12(9) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008.

2. The petitioner states that the petitioner is the owner of

1.85 Ares of land comprised in Re-Survey No.21 of Edapally North Village, Kanayannur Taluk in Ernakulam District. The petitioner purchased the property in the year 2020. The property was included in Data Bank in terms of the provisions of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008.

3. The petitioner’s property is described as ‘Nilam’ in

revenue records. The petitioner filed Form-5 application before the 2nd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer to remove his land from Data Bank. The 2nd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer removed his property from Data Bank on the basis of report submitted by the Agricultural Officer.

4. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted Form-6 application

to the 2nd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer for changing the nature of land in revenue records. A demand for conversion fee has been made by the 2nd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer. The petitioner has been required to pay an amount of Rs.8,14,000/-. The extent of land possessed by the petitioner is less than 25 cents and therefore the petitioner is not legally bound to pay any conversion fee, contends the petitioner.

5. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Government Pleader representing the respondents.

6. The extent of land possessed by the petitioner is only

1.85 Ares. The petitioner would submit that in the hands of the predecessor-in-interest of the property also, the extent of land was less than 25 cents. Ext.P4 would show that the predecessor-in- interest had less than 25 cents. In view of the Circulars of the Government of Kerala exempting the land holdings below 25 cents from payment of conversion fee, the petitioner is entitled to succeed.

The writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the 2nd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer to process the Form-6 application submitted by the petitioner without insisting on payment of conversion fee.

Sd/- N.NAGARESH JUDGE AMR APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20785/2023 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF REGISTERED SALE DEED NO. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 09/02/2023 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PAY-IN -SLIP DATED RESPONDENT. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF SALE DEED DATED 03/02/1994 REGISTERED AS DOCUMENT NO. 662 OF 1994 OF EDAPPALLY SRO.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial