Balasubramanian vs Local Level Monitoring Committee

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 656 Ker
Judgement Date : 7 July, 2025

Kerala High Court

Balasubramanian vs Local Level Monitoring Committee on 7 July, 2025

Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
WP(C) NO. 34414 OF 2024        1

                                                2025:KER:49561

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                            PRESENT

               THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS

    MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 16TH ASHADHA, 1947

                    WP(C) NO. 34414 OF 2024

PETITIONER:

          BALASUBRAMANIAN,
          AGED 62 YEARS
          S/O MADHAVAN, KOTTAPURATHU HOUSE, MAYYAMTHANI,
          NILAMBUR VILLAGE, MALAPPURAM DIST., PIN - 679329


          BY ADVS. SMT.JIBY G.J.
          SMT.SINDHU K.S.
          SMT.AKHILA RAMESH




RESPONDENTS:


    1     LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE ,
          REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER, AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
          NILAMBUR KRISHI BHAVAN, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
          PIN - 679329

    2     VILLAGE OFFICER,
          NILAMBUR VILLAGE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679329

    3     STATE OF KERALA,
          REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
          REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM,
          PIN - 695001

    4     THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
          SUB COLLECTORS OFFICE, NEAR MINI CIVIL STATION,
          PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679322
 WP(C) NO. 34414 OF 2024            2

                                                      2025:KER:49561


   *5        KERALA STATE REMOTE SENSING AND ENVIRONMENT
             CENTRE , REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, 1ST FLOOR,
             VIKAS BHAVAN, NEAR LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY, UNIVERSITY
             OF KERALA SENATE HOUSE CAMPUS, PMG,
             THIRUVANTHAPURAM, PIN-695033
             (ADDL. R5 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED
             13/01/2024 IN I.A.NO.2/2024 IN WP(C) 34414/2024)

             BY SMT.JESSY S. SALIM, GP


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING ON
07.07.2025,     THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 34414 OF 2024       3

                                              2025:KER:49561




                          JUDGMENT

Dated this the 07th day of July, 2025 The petitioner is the owner in possession of 2.03 Ares of land comprised in Re-Survey No.135/1-20 in Re- Survey Block No.93 in Nilambur Village, Nilambur Taluk, covered under Ext.P1 land tax receipt. 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.P7 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 impugned Ext.P8 order, the authorised officer has perfunctorily rejected Ext.P7 application, without inspecting the property directly or calling for satellite images as envisaged under Rule 4(4f) of the Rules. He WP(C) NO. 34414 OF 2024 4 2025:KER:49561 has also not rendered any independent finding regarding the nature and character of the property as on 12.08.2008. Hence, Ext.P8 order is illegal and arbitrary, and is liable to be quashed.

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. 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 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 WP(C) NO. 34414 OF 2024 5 2025:KER:49561 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.P8 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 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, the impugned order has been passed. Thus, I am satisfied that the impugned order has been passed without any WP(C) NO. 34414 OF 2024 6 2025:KER:49561 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.P8 order is quashed.
(ii). The 4th respondent/authorised officer is directed to reconsider Ext.P7 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.P7 application, in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three WP(C) NO. 34414 OF 2024 7 2025:KER:49561 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 NAB WP(C) NO. 34414 OF 2024 8 2025:KER:49561 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 34414/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT NO.

KL10051210896/2024 DATED 09.08.2024 ISSUED FROM NILAMBUR VILLAGE OFFICE EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED.NO.2255/2020 OF NILAMBUR SRO EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE SUMMARY ISSUED FROM ABOVE EMS MEMORIAL COOPERATIVE HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE LTD BY DR.

                      RAJAGOPAL

EXHIBIT P4            TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY
                      VILLAGE    OFFICER,     NILAMBUR  DATED
                      31.01.2024 WITH NO. 32/2024

EXHIBIT P5            TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE DATED 11.04.2023

ISSUED BY SECRETARY NILAMBUR MUNICIPALITY EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE KERALA GAZETTE NOTIFICATION DATED 08.03.2021 WITH REG NO. KL/TV(N)634/2021-2023 EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 5 APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF RDO DATED 16.05.2024 IN FILE NO. 1479/2024 EXHIBIT P9 ORIGINAL PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE PRESENT STATUS OF THE PROPERTY