[Implementation of Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008] Kerala High Court not happy with village officers

The manner in which the Kerala Conservation of Paddy land and Wetland Act, 2008, was being enforced in the State, drew the ire of the Kerala High Court which said that decisions taken by village officers under the Act was resulting in high costs on common man and the court registry (PK Anwar v. Aparna)..Single-judge Justice PB Suresh Kumar said that while the Act mandates that village officers who are part of the local level monitoring committee are supposed to examine each plot of land that is disputed, in practice, such officers seldom do the same."If you look at the rules and statutes, village officers are supposed to go and examine each plot of land themselves before deciding on classification. But in Kerala, from Kanyakumari to Kasargod, officers sit in their office and decide", he said.Justice Kumar also made pertinent observations regarding the cost incurred by the common man and the Court Registry due to the number of cases filed on the matter and more often than not, the subsequent contempt cases due to inaction on the part of officers."In Kerala over 50,000 similar decisions of village officers marking land as cultivable have been reversed and a majority of them have had to approach the court. Imagine the cost on the common man and the Court Registry. A common petitioner has to find and pay for vakalath in not one, but two cases with umpteen appearances. This was a recklessly implemented statute. The cost of it has been immense"The Court was hearing a contempt of court case that arose from a plea filed by the petitioner challenging the classification of land owned by him as "nilam" i.e., paddy/cultivable land by the Local Level Monitoring Committee. It was submitted that this continued despite preferring an application before the committee stating that the land was converted as a dry/garden land several years prior to the introduction of the Act. ."In the light of the decision of the Kerala court in Adani Infrastructure and Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Kerala, in which it was held that the Local Level Monitoring Committee constituted under the Act can look into the ground realities and make appropriate corrections in the data bank at any time, there cannot be any impediment in directing the Local Level Monitoring Committee to consider the request of the petitioner for correction of the data bank", the Court had held in the order passed by it in December,2020. It had, therefore, directed the committee to consider the application of the petitioner and make the necessary changes if deemed appropriate.However, despite the order of the Court, over 8 months later, no action had been taken by the committee and therefore the current contempt of court proceedings were initiated. .Justice Kumar expressed his exasperation at having had to preside over innumerable such cases over the last few years alone. "I have been presiding over this jurisdiction for years now. There have been at least 35,000 cases like this in this Court in the last few years alone," he said.The Government Pleader (GP) who defended the members of the local level monitoring committee, also drew the ire of the Court. The judge opined that the duty of GPs, first and foremost, is to assist the Court."I don't understand why you GPs defend these erring officers in this way. Your job is to assist this Court, not defend erring officers," he remarked.The Court expressed the need to reduce the number of contempt of court cases arising out of such matters and decided to implead all members of the committee. "I will hear them all individually if I have to."