MARY JOHN Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the owner of land comprised in Re- survey No.484/3-1 of Purapuza Village, Thodupuzha Taluk having an extent of 10.51 Ares. The land as per the BTR is a 'nilam'. However, in the data bank, it is entered as converted land in the year 2006 with a cultivation of plantain, coconut, vegetables etc.

(2.) The petitioner approached the Revenue Divisional Officer under Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 (for short, the 'Utilisation Order') to utilize the land for other purposes. The Revenue Divisional Officer noting that there is no cultivation in the land for a long period allowed utilization of the land for other purposes as per his order dated 17.03.2015. Thereafter, the petitioner approached the Grama Panchayath for building permit. The Grama Panchayath, taking note of the order under the Utilisation Order, sought a clarification from the Sub Collector. Acting upon such clarification, the Sub Collector issued Ext.P7. It appears that there was a change of hand in the office of the Sub Collector. The Sub Collector issued Ext.P7 intimating that the District Collector to review the order under Clause 6 of the Utilization Order already passed vide Ext.P4. This order is under challenge in the writ petition.

(3.) The Sub Collector or the District Collector has no power to review the order already passed under clause 6 of the Utilisation Order. Further, the Revenue Divisional Officer had taken a decision after adverting to the nature of the land. In the absence of any fraud being played on such authority it is not open for such authority or the successor in office to review the earlier order passed. Further, the discrepancy as pointed out by the Sub Collector in my view cannot be a reason to review the order. The only consideration under Clause 6 of the Utilization Order whether the holder of the land should be compelled to cultivate crops which were in cultivation or not. If it is found that such cultivation is not possible, the District Collector has no option but to grant permission under Clause 6 of the Utilisation Order. In view of the fact that there is no compelling reason to direct the holder of the land to cultivate crops, which where in cultivation, I am of the view that there is no scope for reviewing the order passed in this matter. Thus, the impugned order is set aside. The Grama Panchayath is free to consider the application in accordance with law for the building permit. The Grama Panchayath is directed to consider the application in the light of the Order already passed in the the matter.