WONDERLA HOLIDAYS Vs. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, a Company, is before this Court seeking to quash Exts.P8 and P10 to the extent it has declared that the construction of ponds so as to facilitate fish farming is in violation of the provisions of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 and seeks to direct the 2nd respondent to grant permission for erecting motor shed for agricultural purpose as requested by the petitioner in Ext.P4 application.

(2.) In the year 2005, the petitioner purchased 50.20 Ares of property in Survey No.390/3-8 of Kizhakkambalam Village. The property is paddy land uncultivated for several years. The petitioner decided to start fish farming in the land as an intermediary crop. The land was accordingly made suitable for paddy cultivation and fish farming. The intention was intimated to the respondents as per Ext.P2 letter. The outer bunds were strengthened using mud and slurry available in the land. For paddy cultivation as well as for fish farming, the petitioner needs to install a water pump, for which a motor shed is to be constructed.

(3.) The Panchayat authorities required the petitioner to submit an application for Building Permit and accordingly, Ext.P4 application was made. The application was rejected as per Ext.P6 communication. The application was rejected on the premises that Section 14 of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 restricts the local authority from granting any licence or permit for carrying out any activity in a paddy land or wetland converted or reclaimed in violation of the provisions of the Act.