IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 6TH OCTOBER 2008 / 14TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 25105 of 2008(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- DR.P.J.SEBASTIAN, PRINCIPAL,JAI BHARATH ARTS & SCIENCE COLLEGE,(AFFILIATED TO THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY AND APPROVED BY ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION), J.B.NAGAR, ARAKKAPPADY, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM-683 554. BY ADV. SRI.S.M.PREM SMT.K.P.SANTHI SRI.S.S.HUSSAIN SRI.P.RAMACHANDRAN (PALAKKAD) SRI.P.K.NIJOY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MOOVATTUPUZHA. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, KUNNATHUNAD, PERUMBAVOOR. BY GP SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).25105/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 6th day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner who is the Principal of Jai Bharat Arts & Science College, Perumbavoor, affiliated to the M.G.University, submitted Ext.P1 application to the second respondent, the District Collector, for permission to level the college ground by spreading soil for the purpose of conducting the Mahatma Gandhi University Intercollegiate Cricket Tournament. But, the petitioner received Ext.P6 communication from the second respondent rejecting Ext.P1 application on the ground that there is a direction from the Government, vide D.O.Letter No.724967/2007/Revenue dated 17.11.2007 which is marked as Ext.P7, not to consider any application for conversion of land. Ext.P1 application was filed before the second respondent under the Land Utilization Act. The respondent has not taken a decision on the application presumably on the basis of a circular issued by the Government which had referred to a proposal for a bill imposing W.P.(C).25105/2008 2 restrictions on conversion of land. It is in these circumstances, the petitioner has approached this court seeking a direction to the District Collector to pass an order on Ext.P1 application ignoring the circular dated 17.11.2007. 2. It is necessary to take note of the fact that the bill which is referred to in the circular has now become an Act, Kerala Conservation of Paddy Lands and Wet Lands Act, Act 28 of 2008. Detailed provisions are contained in the said Act which contemplates prohibition on conversion of paddy land for any other purpose except in the manner provided in the Act. There is similar prohibition in the case of reclamation of wet lands also. Paddy lands and wet lands are also defined in the Act. Essentially the Act contemplates recommendation by the local area committee which is to be constituted in terms of the provisions of the Act. In other words, competent authority will also have taken into account the recommendation of the local area committee and other materials which are considered relevant. W.P.(C).25105/2008 3 3. After hearing counsel on both sides, I am of the view that the second respondent is to pass orders on Ext.P1 application, in accordance with the provisions of Act 28 of 2008. This will require an enquiry whether lands are paddy lands or wet land. If the lands are paddy land or wet land, the respondent shall consider the application in accordance with Act 28 of 2008. If the lands are not paddy lands or wet lands, the respondent shall consider the application under the provisions of the Land Utilization Order. If the competent authority finds that the application is to be considered under the Kerala Land Utilization Order, then the competent authority is bound to conduct an effective enquiry into the details given by the applicant. The provisions of the Land Utilisation Order, which is a subordinate legislation, under the Essential Commodities Act, is meant to be implemented with seriousness. It should not be dealt with casually. It is not only the status of the land in relation to which permission has been sought for, but also the status of the neighbouring properties that is W.P.(C).25105/2008 4 relevant. Possible detrimental effect of conversion of one property forming part of a larger cluster of lands and the attendant ecological factors are to be taken note of by the competent authority. There cannot be a casual approach to an application under the Land Utilisation Order, either for conversion to non agricultural purposes or for permission to use it for purposes other than paddy cultivation. Orders shall be passed within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs