Kerala High Court
Ajith.K.S, S/O. K.L.Sajayan vs State Of Kerala on 17 July, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:52918
WP(C) NO. 26443 OF 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 26TH ASHADHA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 26443 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
AJITH.K.S, S/O. K.L.SAJAYAN,
AGED 27 YEARS
KANNAGARA HOUSE, OOKKOTTUMANNA. P.O.,
CHUNGARTHARA, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 679334
BY ADVS.
SRI.LINDONS C.DAVIS
SRI.G.S.SAJI
SMT.E.U.DHANYA
SMT.N.S.SHAMILA
SMT.CHINJU P. JOYIES
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF
AGRICULTURE AND FARMERS WELFARE, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
COLLECTORATE, MALAPPURAM, COLLECTORATE ROAD, UP
HILL, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676505
3 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, PERINTHALMANNA, NEAR
MINI CIVIL STATION,MALAPPURAM, PIN - 679322
4 DEPUTY COLLECTOR (D.M),
COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, MALAPPURAM, PIN -
676505
2025:KER:52918
WP(C) NO. 26443 OF 2024
2
5 LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE,
(REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER AGRICULTURAL OFFICER)
KRISHI BHAVAN, NILAMBUR, MANALODY, MALAPPURAM, PIN
- 679329
6 AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
KRISHI BHAVAN, NILAMBUR, MANALODY, MALAPPURAM, PIN
- 679329
7 TAHSILDAR,
TALUK OFFICE, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 679329
8 VILLAGE OFFICER,
VILLAGE OFFICE, NILAMBUR, MANALODY, MALAPPURAM,
PIN - 679329
SR.GP SMT. VIDYA KURIKOSE
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 17.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:52918
WP(C) NO. 26443 OF 2024
3
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 17th day of July, 2025 The petitioner is the owner in possession of 3.77 Ares of land comprised in Survey No.165/5-4 in Nilambur Village, Malappuram District, covered under Ext.P1 land tax receipt. The property is a converted land. It is not suitable for paddy cultivation. However, the respondents have erroneously classified the property as 'paddy land' and included it in the data bank. To exclude the property from the data bank, the petitioner had submitted Ext.P3 application in Form 5 under Rule 4(4d) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008 ('Rules' in short). But, by the impugned Ext.P4 order, the 3 rd respondent has perfunctorily rejected Ext.P3 application, without directly inspecting the property. Even though the 6 th 2025:KER:52918 WP(C) NO. 26443 OF 2024 4 respondent had called for Ext.P5 report from the Kerala State Remote Sensing and Environment Centre (KSREC), the same was not considered by the 3 rd respondent. He has also not rendered any independent finding regarding the nature and character of the property as on 12.08.2008. Hence, Ext. P4 order is illegal and arbitrary, and is liable to be quashed.
2. Heard; the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.
3. The petitioner's specific case is that, his property is a converted land. It is not suitable for paddy cultivation. But, the property has been erroneously classified in the data bank as paddy land. Even though the petitioner had submitted a Form 5 application, to exclude the property from the data bank, the same has been rejected by the authorised officer without any application of mind.
4. In a host of judicial pronouncements, this 2025:KER:52918 WP(C) NO. 26443 OF 2024 5 Court has emphatically held that, it is the nature, lie, character and fitness of the land, and whether the land is suitable for paddy cultivation as on 12.08.2008 i.e., the date of coming into force of the Act, are the relevant criteria to be ascertained by the Revenue Divisional Officer to exclude a property from the data bank (read the decisions of this Court in Muraleedharan Nair R v. Revenue Divisional Officer (2023(4) KHC 524), Sudheesh U v. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Palakkad (2023 (2) KLT 386) and Joy K.K v. The Revenue Divisional Officer/Sub Collector, Ernakulam and others (2021 (1) KLT 433)).
5. Ext.P4 order establishes that the authorised officer has not directly inspected the property. Even though Ext.P5 KSREC report was received on 8.12.2022, the 3rd respondent has passed Ext.P4 order on 14.12.2022, without considering Ext.P5 report. He has also not rendered any independent finding regarding the nature and character of the property as on 12.08.2008, 2025:KER:52918 WP(C) NO. 26443 OF 2024 6 or whether the removal of the property from the data bank would adversely affect the paddy cultivation in the locality. Instead, by solely relying on the report of the Agricultural Officer, who in turn has relied on the recommendation of the Local Level Monitoring Committee, the impugned order has been passed. Thus, I am satisfied that the impugned order has been passed without any application of mind, and the same is liable to be quashed and the authorised officer be directed to reconsider the matter afresh, in accordance with law, after adverting to the principles of law laid down by this Court in the aforesaid decisions and the materials available on record.
Accordingly, I allow the writ petition in the following manner:
(i). Ext.P4 order is quashed.
(ii). The 3rd respondent/authorised officer is directed to reconsider Ext.P3 application either by directly inspecting the property or referring to 2025:KER:52918 WP(C) NO. 26443 OF 2024 7 Ext.P5 report. The entire exercise shall be completed within three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE rmm/17/7/2025 2025:KER:52918 WP(C) NO. 26443 OF 2024 8 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26443/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 01.05.2023 ISSUED BY THE NILAMBUR VILLAGE OFFICE Exhibit P2 A COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE DATA BANK PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL GAZETTE ON 08.03.2021 Exhibit P3 A COPY OF THE FORM.5 APPLICATION DATED 09.08.2021 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14.12.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT Exhibit P5 A COPY OF THE KSREC REPORT ALONG WITH COVERING LETTER NO.A-172/2015/KSREC/007615/22 DATED 08.12.2022