Only RDO can demarcate area for water conservancy, rules Kerala HC
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
In such cases, 10% of the applied land must be set apart for water conservancy measures, in accordance with Section 27A (2) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008.
Justice C S Dias issued the ruling in a petition by Chitranjan Thampan of Alappuzha, who sought a direction to RDO to consider his application for changing the nature of his property in the revenue records. The petitioner, who holds possession of 28.25 Ares of unnotified land, had applied to change the nature of only 25.42 Ares, excluding 10% of the total area for water conservancy as required under the Act.
However, his application was rejected, prompting him to approach HC.
The single bench observed that the power to demarcate the area for water conservancy is vested with the RDO. Although the applicant is required to submit a sketch showing the area proposed to be set apart for water conservancy, the RDO, based on reports from the village officer and agricultural officer, is the competent authority to demarcate and approve such an area. The applicant cannot unilaterally deduct 10% of the land and apply for the remainder.
Accordingly, the court directed the petitioner to submit a fresh application along with a new sketch as stipulated under the Rules for changing the nature of the unnotified land.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
9 hours ago
- Time of India
Animal rehab centre near Noida airport to be ready in a year
N oida: Construction has started on the animal rescue and rehabilitation centre near Dhanauri wetland to protect wildlife affected by the Noida International Airport project. The 10-hectare facility will house a veterinary hospital, quarantine unit and specialised enclosures for blackbucks, nilgai, monkeys and Sarus cranes. YEIDA is developing the Rs 3.5-crore project, upgrading it from a temporary to a permanent facility with a 30-year lease, following Wildlife Institute of India's recommendations. After the Central Zoo Authority gave clearance to the project earlier this year, a construction agency was selected to complete the project within a year. You Can Also Check: Noida AQI | Weather in Noida | Bank Holidays in Noida | Public Holidays in Noida A biodiversity conservation plan, drawn up by WII in 2019, had found blackbucks and cranes were mainly found on the land acquired for the airport. Subsequent surveys, of the 1,334 hectares where the first phase of the airport is coming up and the surrounding villages within its 25-km radius, recorded the presence of 258 blackbucks and 76 Sarus cranes. Indian blackbucks are listed under Schedule I of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, which puts restrictions on their capture or translocation. Sarus cranes, listed as "vulnerable" by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), are also protected under Schedule I of the Act. Other animals spotted on the land acquired for the airport project were nilgai, Indian gazelles, monkeys, golden jackals and jungle cats. Initially, the forest department was to construct the animal centre, but last Sept, YEIDA was appointed as the executing agency by UP govt. The centre is proposed to have a medical unit, separate animal enclosures and shelters, and a dedicated team of veterinary doctors.
Time of India
10 hours ago
- Time of India
Maharashtra govt challenges Bombay high court's ‘Kanjurmarg landfill a protected forest' order in Supreme Court
Mumbai: State govt has moved Supreme Court in appeal against the Bombay high court order that declared 120 hectares of the Kanjurmarg dumping site a protected mangrove forest and ordered its restoration. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The land, which has been used as a scientifically operated solid waste ground landfill for Mumbai, receives more than 10,000 metric tonnes of municipal solid wastes every day. Acting on a 2005 HC order to protect mangroves, state notified over 425 hectares of Kanjurmarg land as 'protected forest'. But, in 2009, state de-notified almost 120 hectares from the 425 hectares to create the landfill. BMC, had along with state govt, challenged the protected forest status as a "mistake". In its special leave petition in SC, govt said HC has "erred in setting aside the notification dated Dec 29, 2009, issued by the state without considering that the same was issued in exercise of its rights under Section 21 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 to correct the ex-facie evident error in the July 7, 2008 notification". Section 21 provides that where a power to issue notification is conferred, then that said power includes a power to amend, vary and rescind any notification. "The HC has erred in ignoring both prior and pursuant to the notification, various permissions from a sustainable development standpoint such as environmental clearances for carrying out the activity of waste disposal/landfills on the said lands have been received," the state said. The forest in question was never notified as a reserved forest. Further, the subject land came to be used as a waste disposal ground only after the rectification notification was issued and as such, the question of any diversion of a forest land for non-forest purposes did not arise, the state added.
Time of India
11 hours ago
- Time of India
Feeding of pigeons causing nuisance, posing health risk to people, says HC; allows FIR filing
Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on Wednesday said feeding of a congregation of pigeons was an act causing a public nuisance and also posed a health hazard to people, and directed the Mumbai civic body to file FIRs against persons engaging in such an activity. A bench of Justices G S Kulkarni and Arif Doctor, while hearing a petition filed by a group of animal enthusiasts, noted the issue at hand is one of public health and the grave and potential health hazard to people of all ages at large. The court had earlier this month restrained the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) from demolishing any of the old heritage 'kabutarkhanas' (pigeon feeding spots) in the metropolis, but had said it cannot permit feeding of these birds. Despite the denial of permission, it has been found people continue to feed pigeons at these 'kabutarkhanas', the court noted on Wednesday. "This is now compounded with an emerging situation of utter disregard for law, by those who defiantly continue to feed pigeons in the teeth of our earlier order rejecting pleas supporting any such feeding and congregation of pigeons and now obstruction to civic officials from discharging their duties in this regard," the bench observed. The HC then asked the BMC to penalise those feeding pigeons in defiance of its directives. "We accordingly permit the municipal corporation to lodge prosecutions against any person/s who continues to feed pigeons in defiance of the directives issued by the MCGM (Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai) since such acts would, in our unhesitating view, constitute a public nuisance and likely to spread diseases and endanger human life," the HC said noted. "Such acts undoubtedly expose people at large and particularly those who dwell or occupy property in the vicinity (of pigeon feeding spots) to an eminent danger from the spread of infections/diseases dangerous to human life, in addition to causing a large scale public nuisance," it insisted. The municipal corporation shall take all necessary steps and implement strict measures as they may deem appropriate to stop the congregation of pigeons at the various 'kabutarkhanas' across the metropolis, the bench maintained. The court noted that the major concern today is again of the most vital aspect -- namely the safety and predominance of human health from the menace created by the congregation of pigeons in the kabutarkhanas in question. The HC was hearing the petition by animal lovers Pallavi Patil, Sneha Visaria, and Savita Mahajan, who claimed the BMC began demolishing 'kabutarkhanas' from July 3 without legal backing. They argued the BMC's act violated the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act.
