Kerala High Court
Arvind Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 21 July, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:54144
WP(C) NO. 35539 OF 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2025 / 30TH ASHADHA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 35539 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
ARVIND KUMAR,
AGED 72 YEARS
S/O. GOVINDALU, DOOR NO. 61/689, M.G. ROAD,
RAVIPURAM, KOCHIN, PIN - 682016
BY ADVS.
SHRI.V.N.HARIDAS
SHRI.SAIFUDEEN T.S
SMT.B.SHAMEERA
SMT.NIMISHAMOL SASIDHARAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM,
COLLECTORATE, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682030
3 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, FIRST FLOOR, K.B.JACOB
ROAD, KOCHI, PIN - 682001
2025:KER:54144
WP(C) NO. 35539 OF 2024
2
4 THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (R.R.),
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, 1ST FLOOR OF CIVIL
STATION, KAKKANAD, PIN - 682030
5 LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER, AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
KRISHI BHAVAN, MINI CIVIL STATION, MAIN ROAD,
THRIPUNITHURA, KOCHI, PIN - 682301
6 AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
KRISHI BHAVAN, MINI CIVIL STATION, MAIN ROAD,
THRIPUNITHURA, KOCHI, PIN - 682301
SMT.VIDYA KURIAKOSE, SR.GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL
HEARING ON 21.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:54144
WP(C) NO. 35539 OF 2024
3
C.S.DIAS, J.
---------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.35539 of 2024
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 21st day of July, 2025
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is the owner in possession of 96 Ares and 55 square metres of land comprised in Survey No.48/104 and 16 Ares and 20 square metres of land comprised in Survey No.48/105 of Thekkumbhagam Village in Kanayannur Taluk, covered under Exts.P1 and P2 possession certificates. 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.P6 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 2025:KER:54144 WP(C) NO. 35539 OF 2024 4 impugned Ext.P9 order, the authorised officer has perfunctorily rejected Ext.P6 application, without inspecting the property directly or calling for satellite images as envisaged under Rule 4(4f) of the Rules. He has also not rendered any independent finding regarding the nature and character of the property as on 12.08.2008. Hence, Ext.P9 order is illegal and arbitrary, and is liable to be quashed.
2. Heard; the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior 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 2025:KER:54144 WP(C) NO. 35539 OF 2024 5 application of mind.
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.P9 order establishes that the authorised officer has not directly inspected the property or called for the satellite images as envisaged under Rule 4(4f) of 2025:KER:54144 WP(C) NO. 35539 OF 2024 6 the Rules. He 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. Instead, by solely relying on the report of the Agricultural Officer, who in turn accepted the recommendations 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:
2025:KER:54144 WP(C) NO. 35539 OF 2024 7
(i) Ext.P9 order is quashed.
(ii) The 3rd respondent/authorised officer is directed to reconsider Ext.P6 application, in accordance with law. It would be up to the authorised officer to either directly inspect the property or call for satellite images, as per the procedure provided under Rule 4(4f), at the expense of the petitioner.
(iii) If the authorised officer calls for the satellite images, he shall consider Ext.P6 application, in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months from the date of the receipt of the satellite images. In case he directly inspects the property, he shall dispose of the application within two months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE dkr 2025:KER:54144 WP(C) NO. 35539 OF 2024 8 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 35539/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY COMPRISED IN SY.NO.48/105 DATED 04.03.2023 Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY COMPRISED IN SY.NO.48/104 DATED 02.03.2023 Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR, KANAYANNUR TALUK DIRECTING HIM TO DUMP THE PILING WASTE INTO THIS PROPERTY DATED 13.02.2014 Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR PERMITTING THE CONTRACTING COMPANY TO DUMP PILING WASTE INTO THIS PROPERTY DATED 04.03.2014 Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN WP(C) NO.7486 OF 2014 DATED 01.04.2014 Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 5 APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 19.07.2022 Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT DATED 23.01.2018 Exhibit P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT DATED 02.05.2023 Exhibit P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE REJECTION ORDER ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 13.09.2024 Exhibit P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE KAYANNUR TAHSILDAR (LR) ALLOWING CHANGE OF SUB-DIVISION DATED 29.09.2018