Kerala High Court
Thomas John Muthoot vs The District Collector, Ernakulam on 18 July, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:53608
WP(C) NO. 2872 OF 2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
FRIDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 27TH ASHADHA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 2872 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
THOMAS JOHN MUTHOOT,
AGED 60 YEARS
S/O. MATHEW M THOMAS, M/S MUTHOOT FIN CORP LTD.,
REPRESENTED BY HIS MANAGING DIRECTOR, PUNNAN ROAD,
UNIVERSITY P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695034
BY ADVS.
SHRI.SHERRY J. THOMAS
SRI.JOEMON ANTONY
SRI.RENISH RAVEENDRAN
SHRI.ANTONY NILTON REMELO
SMT.ANJANA P.V.
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM,
COLLECTORATE, ERNAKULAM, KAKKANAD,KOCHI, KERALA,
PIN - 682030
2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
1ST FLOOR TALUK OFFICE, JACOB ROAD, FORT KOCHI,
KERALA, PIN - 682001
3 THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR,
REVENUE RECOVERY, 1ST FLOOR, CIVIL STATION,
KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM, KERALA, PIN - 682030
4 THE TAHSILDAR (LR),
KANAYANNOOR TALUK OFFICE, PARK AVENUE, NEAR SUBHASH
PARK, MARINE DRIVE, KOCHI, KERALA, PIN - 682011
2025:KER:53608
WP(C) NO. 2872 OF 2025
2
5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
POONITHURA VILLAGE OFFICE, SAHODHARAN AYYAPPAN
ROAD, VYTTILA, KERALA, PIN - 682019
6 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
KRISHIBHAVAN, VYTTILA, 1ST FLOOR COCHIN
CORPORATION, VYTTILA SHOPPING COMPLEX, KOCHI,
KERALA, PIN - 682019
7 THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE,
REPRESENTED BY THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
KRISHIBHAVAN, VYTTILA, 1ST FLOOR COCHIN
CORPORATION, VYTTILA SHOPPING COMPLEX, KOCHI,
KERALA, PIN - 682019
8 THE DIRECTOR,
KERALA STATE REMOTE SENSING AND ENVIRONMENT CENTRE,
VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695033
SMT.JESSY S. SALIM, GOVT.PLEADER
SRI.VISHNU S. CHEMPAZHANTHIYIL, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL
HEARING ON 18.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:53608
WP(C) NO. 2872 OF 2025
3
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 18th day of July, 2025 The petitioner is the owner in possession of 49.65 Ares of land comprised in Survey No.528/3-19 in Block No.1 in Poonithura Village, Kanayannur Taluk, covered under Ext.P1 land tax receipt. The property is a converted land. It is not suitable for paddy cultivation. In Ext.P4 data bank, the petitioner's property has been classified as converted land. Nonetheless, the petitioner had submitted a Form 5 application under Rule 4(4d) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008 ('Rules' in short). But, by the impugned Ext.P3 order, the 2 nd respondent has perfunctorily rejected the Form 5 application, by solely relying on the report of the Agricultural Officer. Even though Ext.P7 report from the Kerala State Remote Sensing and Environment 2025:KER:53608 WP(C) NO. 2872 OF 2025 4 Centre (KSREC) was submitted before the 2nd respondent, he has not considered the same. Likewise, pursuant to the directions of this Court in Ext.P2 judgment, the Agricultural Officer had also submitted Ext.P6 report stating that the petitioner's property is not suitable for paddy cultivation. Notwithstanding the above materials, and without rendering any independent finding regarding the nature and character of the petitioner's property, the petitioner's Form 5 application has been rejected. Hence, Ext.P3 order is illegal and arbitrary.
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, even in the data bank it is shown as 'converted land'. Notwithstanding the above facts, to change the nature of the property from the revenue records, he had submitted the Form 5 application. But, 2025:KER:53608 WP(C) NO. 2872 OF 2025 5 the 2nd respondent without any application of mind has rejected the said application.
4. In a host of judicial pronouncements, this 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.P3 order establishes that the 2nd respondent has not directly inspected the property. Even though Ext.P7 KSREC report was received, he has not referred to the said report in Ext.P3 order. Instead, by relying on 2025:KER:53608 WP(C) NO. 2872 OF 2025 6 the report of the Agricultural Officer, he has passed the impugned order. The 2 nd respondent has also not rendered any independent finding regarding the nature and character of the property as on 12.08.2008, or whether the removal of the property from the data bank would adversely affect the paddy cultivation in the locality. 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.P3 order is quashed.
(ii). The 2nd respondent/authorised officer is directed to reconsider the Form 5 application, in accordance with law, and as expeditiously as 2025:KER:53608 WP(C) NO. 2872 OF 2025 7 possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. It would be upto the authorised officer to either directly inspect the property or consider Ext.P7 KSREC report at the time of considering the Form 5 application.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE rmm/18/7/2025 2025:KER:53608 WP(C) NO. 2872 OF 2025 8 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2872/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 3-06-2024 Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP (C) 27467/2024 DATED 09-09-2024 Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 16-12-2024 Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF KERALA GAZETTE DATED 22-02-2021 Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FILE MOVEMENT PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF 6TH RESPONDENT DATED 10-10-2024 WITH RECOMMENDING TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT RDO TO REMOVE THE SAME FROM THE DATA BANK Exhibit P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE KSREC REPORT DATED 06-09-2022