KPV REALITY PVT. LTD. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, a Private Limited Company, is before this Court seeking to quash Exts.P2 and P2(a) to the extent it reclassifies the petitioner's land covered by Ext.P1 as converted dry land.

(2.) The petitioner states that the petitioner is the owner in possession of 2 Hectares and 24.45 Ares of land in ReSurvey Nos.12/2, 12/3, 12/4, 12/4-2, 12/7, 9/20 and 12/10 of Thiruvaniyoor Village in Block No.41, Kunnathunadu Taluk of Ernakulam District. The land was described as paddy land in Revenue records. The petitioner, thereupon, approached the competent authority and the competent authority, as per Ext.P1, ordered to change the nature of the land in Revenue records on certain conditions. The 3rd respondent-Tahsildar, however, issued Exts.P2 and P2(a) orders by which, the Tahsildar has directed to describe the land as 'converted garden land' (XXXX) in Tax Receipts andThandaper. Aggrieved by Exts.P2 and P2(a) orders, the petitioner has filed the writ petition.

(3.) The counsel for the petitioner submitted that Rule 13 of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules clearly described that when a land is reclassified, it should be described as purayidam/dry land and not as converted dry land. The counsel also brought to the notice of this Court a judgment of this Court in WP(C) No.10105/2022, wherein this Court held that when reclassification is done into a garden land, the same cannot be described as 'converted land', since there is no such classification of land as provided in the relevant enactments.