Kerala High Court
Abdurahiman A.K vs State Of Kerala on 1 July, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:47710
WP(C) NO. 33030 OF 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JULY 2025 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 33030 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
ABDURAHIMAN A.K.,
AGED 55 YEARS
S/O. MOHAMMED HAJI, AARUKANDATHIL HOUSE,
AYANKALAM P.O., PONNANI TALUK, MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 679573.
BY ADVS.
SRI.C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL
SRI.P.ABDUL NISHAD
SMT. T.H.RAIHANATH
SHRI.MUHAMMED AMEEN
SMT.KEERTHI JAYAKUMAR
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
2 THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
2025:KER:47710
WP(C) NO. 33030 OF 2023
2
3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM,
COLLECTORATE, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676505.
4 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, TIRUR,
TIRUR P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676101.
5 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
KALADY AGRICULTURAL OFFICE, KALADY P.O., PONNANI
TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679582.
6 THE TAHSILDAR,
PONNANI TALUK, PONNANI P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 679577.
7 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
TAVANUR VILLAGE, TAVANUR P.O., PONNANI TALUK,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679573.
8 THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE,
KALADY AGRICULTURAL OFFICE, KALADY P.O.,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER,
PIN - 679582.
SMT.DEEPA V., GOVT.PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 01.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:47710
WP(C) NO. 33030 OF 2023
3
C.S.DIAS, J.
==================
W.P (C ) No.33030 of 2023
==================
Dated this the 1st July, 2025
JUDGMENT
The writ petition is filed to quash Exts.P15 and P19 orders passed by respondents 4 and 3 respectively.
2. The petitioner is the owner in possession of 37.23 Ares of land in Survey Nos.103/6 and 103/8 in Tavanur Village in Ponnani Taluk, covered under Ext.P2 land tax receipt. The property was purchased by the petitioner's father in the year 1961. There is a building in the property, which is more than 60 years old and the petitioner is conducting a saw-mill in the property. Ext.P3 tax receipt issued by the Tavanur Grama Panchayat substantiates the above aspect. However, the respondents have erroneously classified the 2025:KER:47710 WP(C) NO. 33030 OF 2023 4 property as 'paddy land' in the revenue records. To change the nature of the property, the petitioner submitted Ext.P5 application under Section 27A read with Rule 12(13) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act and Rules, 2008 ('Act and Rules' in short). But, by the impugned Ext.P15 order, the 4 th respondent rejected the application. Even though the petitioner challenged the order in an appeal before the 3rd respondent, the same was also rejected by Ext.P19 order. Exts.P15 and P19 are erroneous and arbitrary. Hence, the writ petition.
3. The 4th respondent has filed a statement, inter alia, stating that, the petitioner was directed to prove that his property was converted prior to 04.07.1967, as provided under Rule 12(13) of the Rules. Consequently, the petitioner submitted Ext.P12 certificate issued by the Secretary of the Tavanur Grama Panchayat to prove 2025:KER:47710 WP(C) NO. 33030 OF 2023 5 that there was a building, aged approximately 50 years, in the property. He also produced Ext.P13 award issued by the Special Tahsildar, LA (NH), Tirur. But, the petitioner did not produce any document to show that the property was converted prior to 04.07.1967. Accordingly, Exts.P15 and P19 orders were passed. There is no error in the said orders.
4. The petitioner has filed a reply-affidavit refuting the allegations in the statement filed by the 4 th respondent. He has asserted that he had produced Exts.P12, P13, P14 and P16 documents before the 4 th respondent to prove that the property was converted before 04.07.1967. But, the 4 th respondent has not considered the relevance of the documents in their proper perspective. Instead, the 4th respondent has, in a superficial manner, referred to the documents in Ext.P15 order and refused to consider their relevance.
2025:KER:47710 WP(C) NO. 33030 OF 2023 6 The same procedure was followed by the 3 rd respondent in Ext.P19 order.
5. Heard; the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.
6. The petitioner's specific case is that his property has been naturally filled up prior to 04.07.1967. In order to change the nature of the property in the revenue records, the petitioner submitted Ext.P5 application before the 4th respondent. To prove the fact that the property was naturally filled up before 04.07.1967, the petitioner produced Ext.P12 certificate issued by the Secretary of Tavanur Panchayat, to substantiate that there is a 50 year old building in his property, Ext.P13 award again to prove that there is a building in the property as on the date of award, i.e., 16.09.1991 and Ext.P14 mortgage deed dated 11.07.1977, wherein there is a recital that the 2025:KER:47710 WP(C) NO. 33030 OF 2023 7 mortgage includes the property and a building. Nevertheless, the 4th respondent only merely referred to the said documents, but did not render any specific finding for accepting or rejecting the documents. Instead, the 4th respondent has made a cursory reference to the documents and stated that there is no material to prove that the property was naturally filled up prior to 04.07.1967 and passed Ext.P15 order. In the appeal, by Ext.P19 order, the 3rd respondent reiterated the very same findings of the 4th respondent. The respondents 3 and 4 have not rendered any independent finding regarding the property as on 04.07.1967.
7. The crucial aspect to adjudicate an application filed in Form-9 under Rule 12(13) of the Rules is whether the property was filled up naturally prior to 04.07.1967. In order to substantiate the said fact, the 2025:KER:47710 WP(C) NO. 33030 OF 2023 8 applicant is required to produce the title deeds, valid agreements, building tax receipts, licences, details of the standing trees and other details. The Revenue Divisional Officer can also call for an enquiry report from the Village Officer to decide the said application.
8. In the case at hand, the petitioner has produced Exts.P12, P13, P14 and P16 documents before the 4th respondent, which have been referred to in Ext.P15 order. But, the 4 th respondent has not rendered any independent finding regarding the relevancy or evidentiary value of the documents to prove that the property was naturally filled up as on 04.07.1967. Instead, the 4th respondent has only held that there is no document to prove that the property was naturally filled before 04.07.1967. In the appeal also, the 3rd respondent has not re-appreciated the matter, but has reiterated the same view of the 4 th 2025:KER:47710 WP(C) NO. 33030 OF 2023 9 respondent. It was upto the respondents 3 and 4 to have discussed about the above documents and render a specific finding to reject the documents. Thus, I am convinced that the matter is to be remitted back to the 3rd respondent to consider Ext.P17 afresh, and render a specific finding on the documents produced by the petitioner.
Accordingly, I allow the writ petition by quashing Exts.P15 and P19 orders and directing the 3 rd respondent to reconsider Ext.P17 appeal, in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible, especially to advert to Exts.P12, P13, P14 and P16 documents and render a finding regarding the relevancy of the documents in Ext.P5 application. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this writ petition, the statement filed by the 4th respondent and the reply-affidavit along with a copy of this judgment to the 3 rd respondent, who shall 2025:KER:47710 WP(C) NO. 33030 OF 2023 10 make an endeavour to dispose of Ext.P17 appeal within an outer time limit of four months from the date of production of a copy of the judgment.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE dkr 2025:KER:47710 WP(C) NO. 33030 OF 2023 11 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 33030/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.3848/1996 OF SRO EDAPPAL DATED 22.11.1996 EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT ISSUED BY TAVANUR VILLAGE OFFICER DATED 19.4.2021 EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PROPERTY TAX RECEIPT ISSUED BY TAVANUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH DATED 15.9.2021 EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE DATA BANK PREPARED BY THE 8TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 16.12.2020 EXHIBIT P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 27.10.2020 EXHIBIT P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE 7TH RESPONDENT DATED 28.1.2021 EXHIBIT P8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PROFORMA PREPARED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT DATED 28.1.2021 EXHIBIT P9 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT DATED 22.01.2021 EXHIBIT P10 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 9 APPLICATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 8TH RESPONDENT DATED 08.10.2021 EXHIBIT P11 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P.(C). NO.
19560/2021 DATED 25.10.2021 EXHIBIT P12 THE TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE TAVANUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT DATED 09.11.2021 EXHIBIT P13 THE TRUE COPY OF THE AWARD NO.9/91 PASSED BY THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, LA (NH) TIRUR DATED 16.09.1991 2025:KER:47710 WP(C) NO. 33030 OF 2023 12 EXHIBIT P14 THE TRUE COPY OF THE MORTGAGE DEED EXECUTED BY SRI.AARUKANDATHIL MOHAMMED DATED 11.11.1977 EXHIBIT P15 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 24.03.2022 EXHIBIT P16 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE TAVANUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH DATED 08.08.2022 EXHIBIT P17 THE TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 28.10.2022 EXHIBIT P18 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P. (C).NO.13283/2022 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 16.11.2022 EXHIBIT P19 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 12.09.2023