IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 2ND JUNE 2009 / 12TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 2020 of 2009(M) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- ISMAIL, PATTERI MANNIL (P.O) MUYIPOTH, (VIA) MEPPAYUR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.C.VALSALAN MR.K.RAKESH ROSHAN SMT.THUSHARA.V RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KOZHIKODE CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE. 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, CHERUVANNUR , (P.O.) CHERUVANNUR, (VIA) MEPPAYYUR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 3. T.V.BABU, THARAVATTATH HOUSE, (P.O.) CHERUVANNUR, (VIA) MEPPAYYUR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.R DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Rs/ THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.2020 of 2009-M = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 2nd day of June, 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioner challenges the refusal of the Revenue Divisional Officer to consider an application submitted by the petitioner for permission to fill what he calls as channels or water-logged portions within a parcel of land belonging to him and on which he has made coconut and other cultivations. The RDO has washed his hands off by stating that the Principal Secretary in the Revenue Department has informed that no applications need be received in view of the fact that a proposed legislation is about to be tabled in the State Legislature. The flow of law in terms of what we understand as Rule of Law is a continuous process and cannot be impaired by the executive on the apprehension of a situation that WP(C)2020/09 -: 2 :- may be generated by passing a legislation which is yet to come. Whatever that be, with the passage of time, as of now, Act 28/2008, which deals with the conservation of paddy fields, has come into being. The learned counsel for the petitioner rightly made reference to a precedent laid down by this Court in Jayakrishnan v. District Collector and others, 2008(4) KHC 514, which makes the clear distinction between the proceedings to be taken under the Kerala Land Utilization Order which is an order issued under the Essential Commodities Act and Act 28/2008 which is a State legislation. Under such circumstances, the impugned Ext.P5 is quashed. Following this judgment, the competent authority will take appropriate action on the application of the petitioner in terms of the relevant laws and taking into consideration all relevant reports, facts and factors and also the decision of this Court referred to above. A final decision shall follow within a period of 45 days from the date of WP(C)2020/09 -: 3 :- receipt of a copy of this judgment. All other issues are left open. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, Sha/020609 JUDGE.