Hrishikesh Roy, C.J. - Heard Sri.P.B. Sahasranaman, the learned counsel for the appellants/writ petitioners. Also heard Sri.M.H.Hanil Kumar, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

2. The appellants are the owners of property having an extent of 75.60 Ares of land in the Re-Sy.Nos.487/2A/5, 522/11A/2, 522/7C, 522/11A/1 of Block No.13632 and 13633 of Punalur Village. They submitted application before the Tahsildar (LR), Punalur seeking additional entry in the Basic Tax Register in accordance with the current lie and nature of the property. The land owners projected that they had already secured favourable order on 19.12.2017 (Ext.P2) whereby, they were permitted to make construction of commercial building on 70.66 Ares of their land, by the Revenue Divisional Officer under the Kearla Land Utilization Order, 1967, subject to the following conditions:

1. The flow of water in the land shall not be disturbed. It shall not cause flow of water in the canal on the southern side and boundary wall shall be constructed to protect it.

2. Steps shall be taken for waste management which shall not affect the agricultural activities being carried on in the neighbouring lands.

3. No concrete shall be used on the land other than the plinth area. Throughout the boundaries on all sides a three metre canal shall be constructed for collecting water and percolate it.

4. If any time any fees is prescribed for regularizing the conversion in future it has to be remitted by the applicant.

3. The learned Judge, after due consideration of the projection made from the Writ Petitioners side, took note of the provisions of Section 27C of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2018 (hereinafter Paddy Act), as amended in 2018 and directed the Writ Petitioners to comply with the procedure under the amended provisions of the Paddy Act, for getting the Basic Tax Register corrected. Thus aggrieved, the present Appeal is filed by the Writ Petitioners.

4. What is relevant in the above context is that the order permitting construction of commercial building on the land was granted under the Ext.P2 order, which was in pursuant to the judgment dated 13.9.2017 in the W.P.(C)10034/17 (Ext.P1). The learned Judge issued direction by adverting to a report to the effect that a substantial portion of the property has been converted prior to the Paddy Act and only a small portion is remaining as paddy land. Such finding in the W.P.(C)10034/17 was not challenged by the State in further proceedings and has therefore, attained finality. Only pursuant to the above finding, the Ext.P2 order was passed under the Clause 2 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order, 1967 permitting construction over a limited extent of land (70.66 Ares). In such backdrop, the re-consideration of the application in reference to the 2018 amended provisions of the Paddy Act, could not have directed.

5. Since the impugned direction is found to be unmerited, we deem it appropriate to set aside the said order. The Writ Appeal is accordingly allowed by directing the Tahsildar to effect the consequential correction in the Basic Tax Register concerning the land in question, based on the Ext. P2 order already passed by the Sub Collector/Revenue Divisional Officer, without referring to the provisions of the Paddy Land Act. Necessary correction in this regard should be effected within four weeks from today.

6. It is ordered so accordingly. With the above order, the Writ Appeal is allowed.