IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 18TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 27TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 24934 of 2008(R) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ BASIL ABRAHAM, MOOLAYIL HOUSE, PORINGALA, KUNNATHUNADU ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.P.JACOB SRI.T.P.GOPAKUMAR RESPONDENTS: ------------- REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, RDO OFFICE, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY SMT.SUDHADEVI, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V. GIRI, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.24934 of 2008 ------------------------------- Dated this the 18th September, 2008. J U D G M E N T Petitioner purchased 12.60 Ares of property situated in Survey No.61/14 of Aikkaranadu North Village under Ext.P1 document. According to the petitioner, though the land is shown as agricultural land in the revenue records, it is actually lying as a dry land. Petitioner seeks reclamation of the land for non agricultural purposes. He has submitted Ext.P2 application in this regard before the Revenue Divisional Officer, and the same is pending consideration. 2. I heard the learned Government Pleader also. Learned Government Pleader submits that petitioner apparently intends to put up a residential building in the property and wants a No Objection Certificate in that regard from the Revenue Divisional Officer. It is submitted that the actual status of the land will have to be verified. W.P.(C) No.24934/2008 2 3. When an application for permission under the Land Utilisation Order is filed, 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 relatin to which permission has been sought for, but also the status of the neighbouring properties that is relevant. Possible detrimental effect of conversion of one property forming part of a larger cluster 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. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider Ext.P2 and pass appropriate orders thereon, keeping in mind the observations W.P.(C) No.24934/2008 3 made above, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If by the time Ext.P2 is taken up for consideration, the Land Utilisation Order is superseded or modified by any legislation, then the application be dealt with under th Law then prevailing. V. GIRI, JUDGE nj.