LAWS(KER)-2020-6-190

SATHEESH KUMAR B. Vs. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER

Decided On June 10, 2020
Satheesh Kumar B. Appellant
V/S
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case set up in this writ petition is as follows:- The petitioner holds a parcel of land comprising of 0.0610 hectares (approximately 15 cents) in Sy.Nos.29 & 34 of Palakkad II Village in Palakad Taluk, within the jurisdiction of the Palakkad Municipality. The petitioner had approached the 2 nd respondent to get the erroneous entries in the data bank corrected and he had also approached the 1st respondent RDO with an application under Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order. This honourable court by Ext.P4 judgment directed the 2 nd respondent to consider the application submitted for correction of the erroneous entries in the data bank. This Court simultaneously held that if the petitioner was successful in getting favorable orders from the 2 nd respondent, his application under Clause 6 of the KLU has to be considered by the 1st respondent.

(2.) The 2nd respondent after getting relevant inputs from the Kerala State Remote Sensing and Environment Centre allowed the application and issued a notification deleting the petitioner's property from the data bank. The 1st respondent, instead of considering Ext.P3 application under the KLU, insisted that the petitioner submit yet another application under Rule 4(d) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land & Wet Land Rules and thereafter rejected the same, instead of considering the application under Clause 6 of the KLU as directed by this Court. The property in question is surrounded by buildings and denying the petitioner the benefit of using his land for other purposes as contemplated under the KLU causes very serious prejudice to him. Hence this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) In the light of these averments and contentions, the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition with following prayers:-