HAJEE ABUBAKER Vs. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner applied for permission to convert a piece of wetland, under the provisions of the KLU Order in 2007. That with its reminders, was pending consideration on the date of commencement of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 the 'Wetland Act', for short. This Court directed consideration of the petitioner's request. By the impugned order, the request of the petitioner stands rejected on the ground that Conservation Act has come into force and the petitioner has to seek permission under that Act. This is under challenge.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

(3.) The Wetland Act came into force on 12/08/2008. S.3(1) prohibits conversion or reclamation of paddy land, except in accordance with the provisions of that Act on and from the date of commencement of that Act. S.2(12) defines paddy land to mean 'all types of land situated in the State where paddy is cultivated at least once in a year or suitable for paddy cultivation but uncultivated and left fallow, and includes its allied constructions like bunds, drainage channels, ponds and canals'. S.9(1) provides for District Level Authorised Committee, to consider applications for reclamation of paddy land. S.10 empowers the Government to grant exemption. S.14 enjoins that notwithstanding anything contained in the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 or in the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994, no Local Authority shall grant any licence or permit under those Acts, for carrying out any activity or construction in a paddy land or a wetland converted or reclaimed in contravention of the provisions of the Wetland Act. With these provisions, no order could have been passed on an application under the KLU Order on and after coming into force of the Wetland Act. Hence the impugned order stands.