IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2011 / 17TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 18489 of 2011(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- C. RAMAKRISHNAN, AGED 63 YEARS, S/O. M. ANANDAN, NARONPARAMBATH MULLAN HOUSE, WEST PONNIAM P.O., THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN SRI.V.VENUGOPAL RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT-670001. 2. THE TAHSILDAR KANNUR KANNUR DISTRICT-670001. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, EDAKKAD VILLAGE, EDAKKAD,KANNUR DISTRICT-670007. 4. THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE OF EDAKKAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH-REPRESENTED BY CONVENER, AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, EDAKKAD KRISHI BHAVAN, AS CONSTITUTED UNDER KERALA CONSERVATION OF PADDY LAND AND WET LAND ACT 2008.PIN-670007. 5. THAZHATHUPURAYIL ABDUL HAMEED HAJI, S/O. MUHAMMED MUSALIYAR,AGED 59 YEARS, RAINBOW HOUSE, CHOTTAD, P.O.MADAI-670304. 6. KOYAMMADATH KHADEEJA, AGED 45 YEARS, W/O. ABDUL HAMEED HAJI, RAINBOW HOUSE, CHOOTTAD, P.O.MADAI-670304. 7. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR DISTRICT-670001. 8. THE EDAKKAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, EDAKKAD, KANNUR DISTRICT-670007. WPC NO.18489/11 -2- 9. THE SECRETARY, EDAKKAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH, EDAKKAD, KANNUR DISTRICT-670007. 10. THE DISTRICT TOWN PLANNER, KANNUR, PIN-670001. SR.GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.18489/11 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE DATA BANK OF PADDY LAND AND WETLAND PREPARED IN TUNE WITH THE ACT. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, EDAKKAD KRISHI BHAVAN TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 3.9.2010. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER TO THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, THALASSERY. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE RVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, THALASSERY DATED 13.1.2011. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE EDAKKAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH SECRETARY. EXT.P5(a): TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DISTRICT TOWN PLANNING OFFICER. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, EDAKKAD KRISHI BHAVAN. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING CONVENED ON 24.1.2011. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 18489 OF 2011 (I) ===================== Dated this the 8th day of July, 2011 J U D G M E N T The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P7. Respondents 5 and 6 are the owners of 8 acres of land in R.S. 16/1 of Edakkad Village, Chala Kizhakkekara Desom in Kannur District. On the assumption that the land is one to which the provisions of Act 28 of 2008 applies, the said land was included in Ext.P1 data bank prepared under Section 5 of the Act. 2. Subsequent to Ext.P1, owners of the land appears to have made Ext.P6 complaint stating that long before they purchased the land, the land was reclaimed as a garden land, and therefore, its inclusion in the data bank was erroneous. Based on the complaint. Ext.P7 decision has been taken by the Local Level Monitoring Committee excluding 7.9 acres of land from the purview of the data bank. It is challenging the said decision, the writ petition has been filed. 3. A reading of Ext.P7 proceedings show that, on receipt of Ext.P6 complaint from the affected parties, the land in question was inspected by the Panchayat President, Agricultural Officer WPC No. 18489/11 :2 : and the Village Officer. They also have conducted enquiries with the local people. In such an enquiry, they found that except 10 cents of land, rest of the land was reclaimed atleast 6 years prior to the purchase of the land. It is based on such information and the materials collected by the inspecting team that Ext.P7 decision was taken. 4. The data bank is one prepared by the Local Level Monitoring Committee. When the mistakes in the preparation of the data bank was pointed out, the Local Level Monitoring Committee conducted enquiry into the allegations and realising the mistakes, they have decided to correct the same. 5. I do not find anything erroneous in the decision taken in Ex.P7. Writ petition is only to be dismissed and I do so. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp