VIJAYA BABU Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I am considering these two Writ Petitions together since the factual circumstances presented in them are inter-layered with each other and the parties, albeit on either side, are common in both these cases.

(2.) WP(C)No.9345/2019, which is the first among the two, has been filed by a certain Sri.Vijaya Babu impugning Ext.P5 order issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO for short) under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order (KLU order for short), as also Ext.P6 order- issued by the Land Revenue Commissioner (Commissioner for short) in an appeal filed against Ext.P5, as being illegal and unlawful.

(3.) According to Sri.Vijaya Babu, he had earlier approached this Court by filing WP(C)No.3522/2017, which culminated in Ext.P2 judgment, wherein his properties-situated in two among the five survey numbers-were found, ineluctably, to have been converted much prior to the coming into force of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act ((herein after referred to as 'the Paddy Land Act' for short). He says that, as is clear from the said judgment, this Court had concluded that his properties in Sy.Nos.221 and 222 have been converted much prior to the year 2008 and therefore, liable to be excluded from the Data Bank, after assessing and examining reports of the Local Level Monitoring Committee (LLMC for short) as also the satellite images obtained from the Kerala State Remote Sensing Agency and Environment Centre (KSRSEC for short).