RUBY SONEY Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ext. P6 order passed by the 3rd respondent declining the relief sought for, as per Ext. P4 and relegating the petitioner to approach the Local Level Monitoring Committee for getting necessary relief is subject matter of challenge in this writ petition.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that she is the owner of the land having an extent of 31.20 Ares of land situated in Re. Sy No. 512/15 of Athirampuzha village and that the said land is never a 'paddy land' as defined under Section 2(xii) or 'wet land' as defined under Section 2(xviii) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy land and Wetland Act 2008 (Act 28 of 2008), but is a 'reclaimed land' and that lot of improvements have been made therein including age old trees and such other items. The property has been shown in the Data Bank Register, as a converted land, as borne by Ext. P3, having reclaimed as early as in 2000. Ext. P2 is the certificate issued by the Agricultural Officer as early as on 08.09.2009, as to the physical nature of the property. The petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P. (C) No. 29636 of 2012, seeking for a direction to the concerned respondent, to consider the application preferred by the petitioner for making use of the land concerned for 'other purposes' to be dealt with under the relevant provisions of Kerala Land Utilization Order. The said writ petition was disposed of, as per Ext. P5 judgment, directing the 3rd respondent to consider the application and to pass appropriate orders. It was pursuant to the said direction, that Ext. P6 order came to be passed by the 4th respondent on 04.03.2013, whereby a strange inference has been made, declining the relief at the hands of the said respondent and relegating the petitioner to approach the Local Level Monitoring Committee.

(3.) Heard the learned Special Government Pleader as well.