Kerala High Court
Varghese Antony vs The Revenue Divisional Officer on 9 July, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:50296
WP(C) NO. 40446 OF 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 18TH ASHADHA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 40446 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
VARGHESE ANTONY,
AGED 51 YEARS
S/O.ANTONY VARGHESE, KOLUTHARA HOUSE, SHANTHI
NAGAR ROAD, OPPOSITE AXIS BANK, TEVARA, ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 682013
BY ADV SMT.M.S.SHAMLA
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA
DISTRICT, PIN - 688001
2 THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR,
CIVIL STATION, COLLECTORATE, ALAPPUZHA, PIN -
688001
3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
THYKATTUSSERY VILLAGE OFFICE, ALAPPUZHA, PIN -
688528
4 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
AGRICULTURE OFFICE,THYCATTUSSERY, ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 688528
GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. JESSY S.SALIM
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 09.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:50296
WP(C) NO. 40446 OF 2024
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 9th day of July, 2025 The petitioner is the owner in possession of 38 Ares and 78 Sq.metres of land comprised in Survey No.19/1B-1 in Thaikkattussery Village, Cherthala Taluk, covered under Ext.P2 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.P3 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 ExtP4 order, the authorised officer has perfunctorily rejected Ext.P3 application, without inspecting the property directly or calling for satellite images as envisaged under Rule 4(4f) of the Rules. He has also not 2025:KER:50296 WP(C) NO. 40446 OF 2024 3 rendered any independent finding regarding the nature and character of the property as on 12.08.2008. Hence, Ext. P4 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 2025:KER:50296 WP(C) NO. 40446 OF 2024 4 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.P4 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 reports of the Agricultural Officer and the Village Officer, the impugned order has been passed. Thus, I am satisfied that the impugned order has been 2025:KER:50296 WP(C) NO. 40446 OF 2024 5 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:
(i). ExtP4 order is quashed.
(ii). The 2nd respondent/authorised officer is directed to reconsider Ext.P3 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.P3 application, in accordance with law and as 2025:KER:50296 WP(C) NO. 40446 OF 2024 6 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 rmm/9/7/2025 2025:KER:50296 WP(C) NO. 40446 OF 2024 7 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 40446/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF SALE DEED NO.1880/2001 DATED 26.06.2001 OF PANAVALLY SRO Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT FOR THE YEAR 2023-2024 DATED 15/10/2024 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN FAVOR OF THE PETITIONER Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER IN FORM NO.5 BEARING NO2/2022/1079829 DATED 22/12/2022 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REJECTION ORDER VIDE NO.
1721/2023 DATED 01/12/2023 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE FAVORABLE ORDER DATED 15.2.2023 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE 1ST RESPONDENT OFFICE DATED 16.1.2024 Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF SUBORDINATE OFFICER SUBMITTED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT TAKEN UNDER RTI ACT DATED 12.3.2024 Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THELETTER NO. J3 105/24 DATED 9.10.2024 SENT BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD AND 4TH RESPONDENT OFFICE Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 28.10.2024 Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 28.10.2024 TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PROPERTY