Kerala High Court
Asha Jayaprakash vs The Revenue Divisional Officer on 30 July, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
WP(C) NO. 29498 OF 2024 1
2025:KER:56436
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. 29498 OF 2024
PETITIONERS:
1 ASHA JAYAPRAKASH ,
AGED 59 YEARS
W/O, JAYAPRAKASHM KARTHIKA, KANIYAMPUZHA ROAD
MATHOOR EROOR P.O., ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682306
2 NAUFAL,
AGED 49 YEARS
S/O FAKRUDHIN, ANGAMPARAMBIL(H) 2/2 GCDA,
KUNJATTUKARA EDATHALA P.O.ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683561
BY ADV SMT.M.S.SHAMLA
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE FORT KOCHI,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682001
2 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
ALUVA EAST VILLAGE OFFICE, ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 683563
3 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
AGRICULTURE OFFICE, PUKKATTUPADI,ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 683561
BY SMT.JESSY S SALIM, GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
30.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 29498 OF 2024 2
2025:KER:56436
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 30th day of July, 2025 The petitioners are the owners in possession of 5 Ares and 35 Sq.Metres of land comprised in Re-Survey Nos.154/14-3 and 5 Ares and 35 Sq.Metres of land comprised in Re-Survey No.154/13 in Aluva East Village, Aluva Taluk, covered under Ext.P1 sale deed and Ext.P2 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 a Form 5 application, under Rule 4(4d) of the Rules. However, by Ext.P5 order, the authorised officer has summarily rejected the application without directly inspecting the WP(C) NO. 29498 OF 2024 3 2025:KER:56436 property. Even though the authorised officer had called for Ext.P4 report from the Kerala State Remote Sensing and Environmental Centre (KSREC), wherein it has been specifically observed that the property is a fallow land with mixed vegetation/plantations/trees towards the east side in the data of 2008, the authorised officer has held that there is no material to substantiate that the property was converted before 2008. Ext.P5 order is devoid of any independent finding regarding the nature and character of the property as it existed on 12.08.2008 - the date the Act came into force. Therefore, the impugned order is arbitrary and is liable to be quashed.
2. In the statement filed by the 3 rd respondent it is contended that, the members of the Local Level Monitoring Committee (LLMC) had inspected the property on 30.09.2022. They found that the property is lying fallow as a single plot covered with grass. Therefore, the said members had recommended to call for the satellite pictures and consequently Ext.P4 report was called for. In WP(C) NO. 29498 OF 2024 4 2025:KER:56436 Ext.P4 report, it is seen that the plot is covered with mixed vegetation/plantations/trees in the data of 2008. The LLMC conducted a study of Ext.P4 report and decided to recommend the authorised officer to retain the property in the data bank. Accordingly, the impugned order was passed.
3. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader.
4. The petitioners' 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 WP(C) NO. 29498 OF 2024 5 2025:KER:56436 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 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 not directly inspected the property. Instead, based on the recommendation of the LLMC, who perused Ext.P4 KSREC report and recommended that the property need not be excluded from the data bank, the impugned order was passed. Thus it is certain that the authorised officer has not rendered any independent finding regarding the nature and character of the property as on the relevant date. It was upto the authorised officer to have either directly inspected the property or considered the observations/conclusions in Ext.P4 report. WP(C) NO. 29498 OF 2024 6
2025:KER:56436 Therefore, I am convinced that the impugned order is vitiated due to the 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 1st respondent/authorised officer is directed to reconsider the Form 5 application, in accordance with the law and as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within 90 days 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 rely on Ext.P4 KSREC report.
The writ petition is thus ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE NAB WP(C) NO. 29498 OF 2024 7 2025:KER:56436 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 29498/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 5359/2008 DATED 19.11.2008 OF ALUVA SRO EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT FOR THE YEAR 2021-2022 DATED 02/09/2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN FAVOR OF THE PETITIONERS EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE DATA BANK ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE KSREC REPORT ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR, KSREC EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REJECTION ORDER ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT BEARING FILE NO.K12- 1960 DATED 10/03/2024 EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PROPERTY