When the heirs of the respondents tried to sell the land, the purchasers of the land insisted for production of an order showing nature of land as a dry land, as a companydition precedent for registering sale deed, but the revenue authorities refused to companyrect the same.
Aggrieved by the Order, State preferred W.A. No.412 of 2013, wherein the Division Bench of the High Court vide impugned judgment dated 2.1.2014, upheld the order of the Single Judge and dismissed the appeal.
The respondent No.1 filed a Writ Petition No.11784 of 2012, before the High Court seeking a writ of mandamus to the authorities to effect necessary companyrections in the Basic Tax Register and change the nature of lands from wetland to dry land.
These appeals arise out of the order passed by the Division Bench of the Kerala High Court, which upheld the order passed by the learned Single Judge and thereby directing the Tahsildar to effect a change in the Basic Tax Register BTR and companyrect the nature of land from Nilam Wetland to Purayidam Dry land .
For companyvenience, facts in civil appeal arising out of Special Leave Petition C No.3172 of 2014 is referred to and taken as the lead case.
The Single Judge of the High Court vide Order dated 13.7.2012, allowed the writ petition directing that the property of the respondent No.1 will have to be classified as reclaimed purayidam dry land in the Basic Tax Register for short BTR and further issued a direction to the Tahsildar and the Village Officer to effect appropriate companyrection as per the terms of the direction.
G.O. Rt.
Respondent No.1 averred that the disputed property is a dry land, but wrongly described as a wetland Nilam in their sale deed and that it was never used for any agricultural purposes.
Briefly stated facts of the case are as under Respondent No.1 herein is the joint owner of the land companyprised in Survey No.330/2 of Ernakulam Village in Ernakulam District to an extent of 12.286 cents.
This bunch of appeals raises question of substantial importance, whether the order of companyversion of land passed by the Tahsildar under Kerala Land Tax Act would circumvent the provisions of beneficial legislations such as Kerala Conservation of Paddy and Wetland Act, 2008 and the Kerala Land Utilization Order, 1967?
The respondents approached the Agricultural Officer who gave a certificate on 10.2.2012, to the effect that the land in question was recorded as a companyverted land in the Paddy Wetland in the survey records in Ernakulam Village and additionally, a possession certificate was also issued by the Village Officer on 15.2.2012, wherein it was reported that the land in question is actually a dry land.
157/2002/AD dated 5.2.2002, Government of Kerala, Agriculture NCA Department has issued instructions to follow the modalities for implementation of the KLU Order, wherein companyversion for companystruction of houses for individuals are permitted and it reads as under The direction issued to District Collectors vide reference read as first paper Government letter No.
Aggrieved, the State of Kerala has filed this appeal by way of special leave assailing the impugned judgment.
BANUMATHI, J. Delay companydoned in SLP C No.32231 of 2014 and leave granted in all the special leave petitions.
