USMAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is the absolute owner and in possession of a property having an extent of 03.90 Ares of land comprised in Re-survey No.438/3-2, Choornikkara Village, Aluva Taluk. It is stated that the said property was originally a pucca dry land, but it mentioned as Nilam in the revenue records. The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition is that since the property is described as paddy land in the Data Bank prepared in accordance with the provisions contained in the Act, he is unable to use the property for the purpose of constructing a building.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader.

(3.) If the property of the petitioner is one converted prior to the Act, the provisions of the Act would not apply to the same, as held by the Apex Court in Revenue Divisional Officer v. Jalaja Dileep (2015(1) KLT 984). If the provisions of the Act do not apply to the property of the petitioner, he is entitled to make use of the property for construction of building, after obtaining permission of the competent authority under Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order, 1967 [ See Puthan Purakkal Joseph v. Sub Collector (2015(3) KLT 182)].