Kerala High Court
Hyder Kutti vs State Of Kerala on 30 July, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:56489
WP(C) NO. 41067 OF 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 8TH SRAVANA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 41067 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
HYDER KUTTI,
AGED 63 YEARS
SON OF SHAHUL MAMEED, RESIDING AT OZHUKUPARAPUTHEN
VEEDU, KALLADATHANI, POREDOM, KOLLAM, PIN - 691534
BY ADVS.
SMT.K.P.SANTHI
SMT.PARVATHY R NAIR
SHRI.AJITH C.J.
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY OF REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, TRIVANDRUM, PIN - 695001
2 DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
VIDYA NAGAR, CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM, PIN - 691013
3 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
VIDYA NAGAR, CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM, PIN - 691013
4 DEPUTY COLLECTOR(LR),
VIDYA NAGAR, CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM, PIN - 691013
2025:KER:56489
WP(C) NO. 41067 OF 2024
2
5 AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
KRISHIBHAVAN, CHADAYAMAGALUM, KOLLAM, PIN - 691534
6 THE TAHASILDAR,
KOTTARAKARA TALUK OFFICE, KOLLAM, PIN - 691506
7 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
VILLAGE OFFICE, CHADAYAMAGALAM, KOLLAM, PIN -
691534
SMT.PREETHA K.K., SR.GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 30.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:56489
WP(C) NO. 41067 OF 2024
3
C.S.DIAS, J.
---------------------------------------
WP(C) No. 41067 OF 2024
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 30th day of July, 2025
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is the owner in possession of 19.20 Ares of land, comprised in Survey No.7-4 in Block No.39 in Chadayamangalam Village, Kottarakkara Taluk, covered under Ext.P1 land tax receipt. The property is a converted land and is unsuitable for paddy cultivation. Nevertheless, the respondents have erroneously classified the property as 'paddy land' and included it in the data bank maintained under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008, and the Rules framed thereunder ('Act' and 'Rules', for brevity). To exclude the property from the data bank, the petitioner had submitted Ext.P-4 application in Form 5, under Rule 4(4d) of the Rules. However, by Ext.P5 order, the 2025:KER:56489 WP(C) NO. 41067 OF 2024 4 authorised officer has summarily rejected the application without either conducting a personal inspection of the land or calling for the satellite pictures as mandated under Rule 4(4f) of the Rules. Furthermore, the order is devoid of any independent finding regarding the nature and character of the land as it existed on 12.08.2008 -- the date the Act came into force. The impugned order, therefore, is arbitrary and unsustainable in law and liable to be quashed.
2. In the statement filed by the 4th respondent it is, inter alia, contended that the Local Level Monitoring Committee had inspected the property and has recommended not to exclude the property from the databank. Based on the said recommendation, the Agricultural Officer has submitted a report not to exclude the property.
3. I have heard the learned Counsel for the 2025:KER:56489 WP(C) NO. 41067 OF 2024 5 petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.
4. The petitioner's principal contention is that the applied property is not a cultivable paddy field but is a converted plot. Nonetheless, the property has been incorrectly included in the data bank. Despite filing the Form 5 application, the authorised officer has rejected the same without proper consideration or application of mind.
5. It is now well-settled by a catena of judgments of this Court -- including the decisions 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 [2021 (1) KLT 433] -- that the authorised officer is obliged to assess the nature, lie and character of the land and its suitability for paddy cultivation as on 2025:KER:56489 WP(C) NO. 41067 OF 2024 6 12.08.2008, which are the decisive criteria to determine whether the property is to be excluded from the data bank.
6. A reading of Ext.P5 order reveals that the authorised officer has failed to comply with the statutory requirements. There is no indication in the order that the authorised officer has personally inspected the property or called for the satellite pictures as mandated under Rule 4(4f) of the Rules. Instead, the authorised officer has merely acted upon the report of the Agricultural Officer, who in turn has relied on the report of the Local Level Monitoring Committee. The authorised officer has not rendered any independent finding whether the exclusion of the property would prejudicially affect the surrounding paddy fields. In light of the above findings, I hold that the impugned order was passed in contravention of the statutory mandate and the law laid down by this Court.
2025:KER:56489 WP(C) NO. 41067 OF 2024 7 Thus, the impugned order is vitiated due to errors of law and non-application of mind, and is liable to be quashed. Consequently, the authorised officer is to be directed to reconsider the Form 5 application as per the procedure prescribed under the law.
In the circumstances mentioned above, I allow the writ petition in the following manner:
(i) Ext.P5 order is quashed.
(ii) The 4th respondent/ authorised officer is directed to reconsider the Form 5, in accordance with the law, by either conducting a personal inspection of the property or calling for the satellite pictures as provided under Rule 4(4f) of the Rules, at the cost of the petitioner.
(iii) If satellite pictures are called for, the application shall be disposed of within three months from the date of receipt of such pictures. On the other hand, if 2025:KER:56489 WP(C) NO. 41067 OF 2024 8 the authorised officer opts to inspect the property personally, the application shall be disposed of within two months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment by the petitioner.
The writ petition is thus ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE dkr 2025:KER:56489 WP(C) NO. 41067 OF 2024 9 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 41067/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF TAX RECEIPT DATED 5/1/2024 ISSUED BY VILLAGE OFFICER CHADAYAMAGALUM VILLAGE EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER ON 6-1-2024 BY VILLAGE OFFICER EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE DATA BANK IN RESPECT OF THE PETITIONER'S PROPERTY EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 12-1- 2024 IN FORM NO. 5 SUBMITTED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20-9-2024 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT RESPONDENT ANNEXURES ANNEXURE R4(A) A TRUECOPY OF THE REPORT DATED 03-07-2024 OF THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER , CHADAYAMANGALAM