RAMANKUTTY Vs. PRINCIPAL AGRICULTURAL OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition has been filed challenging Ext. P3 order passed by the District Level Authorized Committee under S. 9(1) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act to the extent of prohibiting the petitioner from transferring the residential building that was allowed to be constructed by invoking the provisions under the above Act and Rules. The Authority which is constituted to grant permission to construct residential building in terms of Ss. 9(1) & 9(8) on being satisfied can accord permission to the applicant to construct residential building. That does not mean a superior right available to such Authority to restrain/bar the absolute right of the petitioner over his property. The respondents have no power or authority to impose any condition while granting permission to the petitioner putting a complete embargo on right of alienation. It is true that for granting permission a satisfaction has to be made by the Authority that the applicant has no other property suitable for the purpose specified under Ss. 9(1) and 9(8) of the Act and Rules. But that does not mean that the Authority has the power to restrain such applicant from transferring his property. In the absence of any provision as such to be specified as a clog to alienation of the land I am of the view that, it is beyond the power of the 2nd respondent. Accordingly, condition No. 2 in Ext. P3 is set aside while retaining the other conditions.