AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Antony Dominic, J.
WP(C) No. 26583/2008
The petitioner is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act. According to the petitioner, under 13 Title Deeds, they have acquired title and possession over 13.93 acres of land situated in different survey numbers of Thrikkakara North Village. The petitioner submits that on purchase and taking over possession of the said property, they attempted to develop the land. However, on the basis that the land was described as paddy field in the revenue records, they were obstructed by the Village Authorities on the ground that the petitioner had attempted to develop the property without obtaining orders as contemplated under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order. It was thereupon that this writ petition was filed praying that respondents 1 to 3 shall be directed to refrain from interfering with the development and filling up of the land, and for a declaration that the Land Utilisation Order has no application to the land owned by the petitioner.
In support of the prayer thus sought by the petitioner, they have placed considerable reliance on the judgment of this Court in Reliance Industries Ltd. v. Commissioner of Land Revenue 2007(2) KLT 850, where it has been held thus:
It is not the intention of the Legislature to enforce the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act or any order issued there under in derogation of the legal effect of the Legislations relatable to Town Planning. If the Town Planning Scheme lawfully notified in terms of Town Planning Act enjoins on a citizen who owns or holds an item of land to put that land only to a particular use in terms of that Act and Scheme there under, he cannot also be compelled under the Essential Commodities Act or any order issued there under, including the KLU order to put the said piece of land to a particular use which would contradict his entitlement to use the said land in terms of the Town Planning Act and the Scheme. The KLU Order issued under the Essential Commodities Act can have an impact in an area covered by a Town Planning Scheme under the Town Planning Act, if at all, only to the extent of those lands which are identified as green strip areas or such other areas which are exclusively earmarked in the Town Planning Scheme for being put to use for cultivation. An area which is a Residential Use Zone or any area other than the Green Strip Area cannot be subjected to the KLU Order. No permission under the KLU Order is necessary for any activity of construction or use of any land in the Residential Use Zone or any other Zone in the KDPTS, other than the Green Strip Area.
The petitioner contends that Ext.P1 is the Structure Plan (General Town Planning Scheme) for Central City of Kochi notified by the Government of Kerala in G.O.(Ms.)No.143/07/LSGD dated 31/05/2007 sanctioned u/s 12(2) of the Town Planning Act 1108 ME and Section 14 of the Madras Town Planning Act, 1920, varying the existing structure plan to the extent as indicated therein. It is stated that in pursuance to the said Plan, Ext.P2 Land Use Map of the Scheme was published, and that, in terms of the said Map, the properties in question are earmarked for "Multipurpose Urban Use (New Urban Centres)". On this basis, and also relying on Exts.P3 & P4, the petitioner''s contend that since the purpose, for which the land in question was earmarked, is not, as a Green Strip Area or for Agricultural Zone, and therefore their case is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in Reliance Industries Ltd.''s case referred to above, and hence that the Village Authorities could not have obstructed them from carrying out developmental works.
A reading of the judgment in Reliance Industries Ltd.''s case show that the petitioner is well founded in their submission that in respect of the land, which are outside Agricultural Zone or Green Strip Area and covered by a Scheme framed under the Town Planning Act, the provisions of the Land Utilisation Order, issued under the Essential Commodities Act, are inapplicable.
The question, which arises for consideration in this case, in the aforesaid background, is whether Ext.P1 Structure Plan (General Town Planning Scheme) For Central City of Kochi, and Ext.P2 Land Use Map have become final, and if so, the area, in which, the land in question is situated, is classified outside Green Strip Area or Agricultural Zone. In my view, this requires a factual adjudication, and the 2nd respondent will be the most competent Officer to adjudicate this issue. On such adjudication, if it is found that the land is outside the Green Strip Area and Agricultural Zone and is covered by the Scheme framed under the Town Planning Act, in view of the law as laid down by this Court in the aforesaid judgment, the petitioner is entitled to be permitted to proceed with the developmental activities without insisting on their obtaining permission as provided under the Land Utilisation Order.
Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition directing the 2nd respondent to decide as to whether the 13.93 acres of land of the petitioner, situated in different survey numbers of Thrikkakkara North Village is outside Agricultural Zone and the Green Strip Area and is covered by Ext.P1 Town Planning Scheme, and if it is found to be correct, to permit the petitioner to carry on with their developmental activities without their obtaining permission under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order.
The petitioner also contended that they are eligible for the benefit of Clause 4.13 of Ext.P1, the Other Special Provisions. This certainly is a matter for the 2nd respondent to consider while adjudicating the issue as above.
It is directed that the 2nd respondent shall decide the matter as directed above with notice to the parties, and as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within eight weeks of production of a copy of this judgment.
WP(C) Nos. 13181, 16957, 28452 & 32645 of 2008
In all these writ petitions, the facts are identical to the facts in WP(C) No. 26583/2008 disposed of as above. In view of the similarity of facts, it is directed that the District Collector shall consider the cases of the petitioners'' in these cases also, in the manner as directed above.
These writ petitions are disposed of as above.