Paulson vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 19 December, 2007

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 35104 of 2007(D)


1. PAULSON, S/O.KANDAMKULATHY JOHN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PULLUR VILLAGE

3. THE MURIYAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT

                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.N.MANOJ

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE

 Dated :19/12/2007

 O R D E R
                         PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J.
                -----------------------------------------------
                      W.P.(C)No. 35104 OF 2007-D
                -----------------------------------------------
                 DATED THIS THE 19th December , 2007

                             J U D G M E N T

The learned Government Pleader on the basis of the written

instructions imparted to him by the Village Officer submits that as

per all basic records maintained in the village office, the property in

question is nilam and therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to

construct the building without permit under the Land Utilisation

Order. But I am convinced on the basis of the submissions made by

Mr. Manoj. T.N., learned counsel for the petitioner, and various

documents which have been placed on record that the ground reality

as of now is that the property has been reclaimed long ago as garden

land and that there are yielding coconut trees standing on the

properties. Since the records placed on record as well as the

photographs which have been submitted across the Bar reveals the

reality that the property has been reclaimed long ago and that the

same is now garden land, the petitioner’s request to construct a

residential building for himself on the property the extent of which

is only 8 cents should be considered. I am of the view that the permit

application filed by the petitioner will have to be accepted by the third

respondent taking into account the ground reality that the property

WP(C)No.35104/2007
-2-

has been reclaimed as garden land long ago. Therefore, I dispose of

this writ petition directing the third respondent to receive Exts.P4

application to file and pass orders on the same ignoring the

nomenclature of the land in the basic records as paddy field. Orders

as directed above will be passed at the earliest and at any rate within

one month of receiving a copy of this judgment. A copy of the

photograph will be placed on record. The writ petition is disposed of as

above.

(PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE)

ks.

WP(C)No.35104/2007
-3-