THANKACHAN Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved with the fact that the petitioner's application, before the Local Level Monitoring Committee (LLMC) and the District Level Authorised Committee (DLAC) for exemption for constructing a homestead, was rejected.

(2.) The petitioner purchased the above land as per Ext.P1 deed. The petitioner then applied for an exemption under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008 ('Paddy Land Act' for short). The petitioner relied on the certificates at Exts.P2 and P3, which evidence that the petitioner does not have any land anywhere else in the locality for constructing a residential house. The petitioner's application before the LLMC, however, was not considered favourably. The LLMC, by its minutes at Ext.P5, found that the petitioner's family has a residential house and, hence, refused to recommend the proposal for exemption. The petitioner then approached this Court with a writ petition. In the writ petition a judgment was passed at Ext.P8.

(3.) The petitioner sought for a direction to the DLAC to consider the recommendation. The DLAC, as per sub section (8) of Sec. 9 of the Paddy Land Act, could not have considered the matter without a recommendation for exemption from the LLMC. In fact, the specific condition under which the LLMC refused to recommend exemption to the petitioner, was the fact of his family owning another piece of land.