Hajee Abubacker v. Revenue Divisional Officer, Palakkad

1. The petitioner applied for permission to convert a piece of wet land, 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 Wet Land Act, 2008, the “Wet Land 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 Wet Land Act came into force on 12.8.2008 S. 3(1) prohi its 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 suita le for paddy cultivation ut uncultivated and left fallow, and includes its allied constructions like unds, drainage channels, ponds and canals”. S. 9(1) provides for District Level Authorised Committee, to consider applications for reclamation of paddy land.

4. S. 10 empowers the Government to grant exemption. S. 14 enjoins that notwithstanding anything contained in the Kerala Panchay at 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 wet land converted or reclaimed in contravention of the provisions of the Wet land Act. With these provisions, no order could have een passed on an application under the KLU order on and after coming into force of the Wet Land Act. Hence the impugned order'stands.

5. In the result this Writ Petition is dismissed in limine.