BY AD vs GEORGE SEBASTIAN

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 2ND PHALGUNA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 4849 OF 2025 PETITIONER: DON JOSEPH, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O. XAVIER, PRAKKATTU HOUSE * MOOLAVATTAM P.O., NATTAKAM, KOTTAYAM, PIN – 686012 *THE FATHER'S NAME OF THE PETITIONER APPEARING IN THE JUDGMENT DATED 21.02.2025 OF WP(C) 4849/2025 IS CORRECTED AS 'JOSEPH ABRAHAM' INSTEAD OF XAVIER AND THE HOUSE NAME AS ‘PRAKKAT HILLS' INSTEAD OF PRAKKATTU HOUSE AS PER ORDER DATED 01.04.2025 IN IA 01/2025 IN WP(C) 4849/2025. BY ADVS. GEORGE SEBASTIAN ADITYA T.P. ANTONY THOMAS RESPONDENTS: 1 THE PEERUMEDU GRAMA PANCHAYATH, PEERUMEDU GRAMA PANCHAYATH OFFICE, PEERUMEDU, AZHUTHA P.O, IDUKKI, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN - 685531 WP(C) NO. 4849 OF 2025 & WP(C) NO. 4854 OF 2025 4 2 3 4 5 6 THE SECRETARY, PEERUMEDU GRAMA PANCHAYATH, PEERUMEDU GRAMAPANCHAYATH OFFICE,PEERUMEDU, AZHUTHA P.O, IDUKKI, PIN - 685531 THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY,DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI COLLECTORATE, IDUKKI, KUYILIMALA, PAINAV P.O.,IDUKKI, PIN - 685603 THE TAHSILDAR (LAND RECORDS), PEERUMEDU, PEERUMEDU TALUK OFFICE, PEERMADE RD, PEERMADE, AZHUTHA, IDUKKI, PIN - 685531 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ELAPPARA, ELAPPARA VILLAGE OFFICE, PEERUMADE, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685501 BY ADV ADV JOICE GEORGE, SC ADV AMMINIKUTTY K., SR.GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.02.2025, ALONG WITH WP(C).4854/2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 4849 OF 2025 & WP(C) NO. 4854 OF 2025 5 JUDGMENT [WP(C) Nos.4854/2025, 4849/2025] In both these writ petitions, the issue involved is one and the same, i.e., the rejection of the applications submitted by the petitioners for building permits by the respondent Panchayat as per orders, which are produced as Ext.P4 in both these writ petitions, on the reason that the properties are described as ‘plantation’ in the revenue records. According to the respondents, granting permission to carry out construction in such a properties would amount to a violation of the statutory stipulations contained in the Kerala Land Reforms Act.

2. I have heard Sri.George Sebastian, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Sri.Joice George, learned Standing Counsel for the Panchayat, Smt.Amminikutty K., learned Government Pleader for the respondents 3 to 6.

3. The learned Government Pleader upon instructions submitted that, the proceedings have been initiated against the WP(C) NO. 4849 OF 2025 & WP(C) NO. 4854 OF 2025 6 petitioner in W.P(C) No.4854/2025 under the provisions of the Kerala Land Reforms Act.

4. The specific contention raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioners is that the issue raised in this writ petition is covered in favour of the petitioners as per the decisions rendered in Elias T.V. And Others v. Sub Collector, Wayanad and Others [2019 (2) KLT 391], Mathew K. Jacob v. District Environmental Impact Assessment Authority [2018 (4) KLT 913] and District Collector v. Sajith Lal [2023 KLT online 1225], which were followed in Exts.P5 to P7 judgments.

5. After perusing the records, I find that the issue raised in this writ petition is covered as per the judgments, wherein it was observed that the mere fact the property is described as ‘plantation’ in the revenue records will not enable the Grama Panchayat to reject the application submitted by the petitioner for building permit. However, such permission would not preclude the Government and the authorities concerned, from continuing or WP(C) NO. 4849 OF 2025 & WP(C) NO. 4854 OF 2025 7 initiating the proceedings under the provisions of Kerala Land Reforms Act. In such circumstances, these writ petitions are disposed of, quashing Ext.P4 with a direction to the Secretary to Peerumedu Grama Panchayath, the 2nd respondent in both these writ petitions, to reconsider Ext.P3 applications without taking into account the fact that the properties are mentioned as ‘plantation’ in the revenue records. Necessary orders in this regard shall be passed within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. However, it is clarified that, this will not preclude the Government from initiating appropriate proceedings or continuing the same, if any, already initiated, against the petitioners under the provisions of the Kerala Land Reforms Act. Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE WP(C) NO. 4849 OF 2025 & WP(C) NO. 4854 OF 2025 8 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4849/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 Exhibit P2 Exhibit P3 Exhibit P4 Exhibit P5 Exhibit P6 Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 22.10.2024 ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT A TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 28.11.2024 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT DATED 16.11.2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03.12.2024 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 06.07.2022 IN WP(C) 4834/2022 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 14.11.2022 IN WP(C) 30199/2022 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 09.01.2025 IN WP(C) 686/2025 WP(C) NO. 4849 OF 2025 & WP(C) NO. 4854 OF 2025 9 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4854/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 Exhibit P2 Exhibit P3 Exhibit P4 Exhibit P5 Exhibit P6 Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 05.04.2024 ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT A TRUE COPY OF THE LOCATION SKETCH DATED 16.01.2025 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT DATED 14.01.2025 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22.01.2025 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 06.07.2022 IN WP(C) 4834/2022 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 14.11.2022 IN WP(C) 30199/2022 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 09.01.2025 IN WP(C) 686/2025