V. T. Mohanan vs The Sub Collector
2023 Latest Caselaw 6680 Ker

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
 TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 30TH JYAISHTA, 1945
                    WP(C) NO. 20036 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

         V. T. MOHANAN
         AGED 62 YEARS
         "VALAYANADUTHARAYIL HOUSE", CHEROTH PARAMBU, P.O
         NADAKAVU, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT., PIN - 673 006.

         BY ADVS.
              M.K.SUMOD
              THUSHARA.K
              RAJ CAROLIN V.
              VIDYA M.K.


RESPONDENTS:

    1    THE SUB COLLECTOR
         OFFICE OF THE SUB COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE
         COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION P.O, KOZHIKODE
         DISTRICT., PIN - 673 020.

    2    THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
         THE OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE
         COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION P.O, KOZHIKODE
         DISTRICT, PIN - 673 020.

    3    THE STATE OF KERALA
         REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT,
         REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
         THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001.

         BY ADV.
              SMT.AMMINIKUTTY (GP)

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP         FOR
ADMISSION ON 20.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME         DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P(C) No.20036 of 2023
                               2

                          JUDGMENT

Dated this the 20th day of June, 2023

The petitioner, who is owner of a property in Elathur

Village of Kozhikode Thaluk, is aggrieved by Ext. P5 decision of

the 1st respondent-Sub Collector of Kozhikode.

2. The petitioner states that the petitioner is holding

20.5 cents of land in Re-Survey No.80/1 of Elathur Village of

Kozhikode Thaluk. The land was included in Data Bank under

the Kerala Conservation of the Paddy Land and Wetland Act,

2008. According to the petitioner, the land stood converted

much prior to the year 2008. As the petitioner wanted to use the

land for other purposes, the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 Form 5

application invoking Rule 4(d) of the Kerala Conservation of

Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 seeking to remove the land

from Data Bank.

3. The petitioner says that the 1st respondent-Sub

Collector, without applying his mind and without perusing the W.P(C) No.20036 of 2023

relevant records, has rejected Ext.P3. Aggrieved by Ext.P5, the

petitioner has approached this Court.

4. Counsel for the petitioner argued that the Agricultural

Officer, who had conducted the inspection, ought to have

understood the purpose of such inspection and he should have

submitted a report containing all relevant factors, so as to

enable the 1st respondent-Sub Collector to take a decision. The

Agricultural Officer submitted a report based only on the

recommendations of the Local Level Monitoring Committee.

Taking into consideration the report of the Agricultural Officer,

the 1st respondent-Sub Collector ought to have obtained a

KSREC report, contends the counsel for the petitioner. Ext. P5

order is liable to be set aside.

4. Government Pleader entered appearance and

resisted the writ petition. The Government Pleader denied all

the averments made by the petitioner in the writ petition. On

behalf of the respondents, it is submitted that on receipt of

Ext.P3 Form 5 application submitted by the petitioner, the W.P(C) No.20036 of 2023

1st respondent-Sub Collector called for a report from the

Agricultural Officer. The Agricultural Officer submitted a report

dated 27.08.2021. The report pointed out that there is

waterlogging in the middle of the property in question. The

Agricultural Officer advised not to remove the land from Data

Bank. It is based on the advice and report of the Agricultural

Officer that Ext.P5 has been passed. Ext.P5 cannot be

impugned on any of the grounds urged by the petitioner, argued

Government Pleader.

5. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner

and the learned Government Pleader representing the

respondents.

6. The petitioner would submit that the land of the

petitioner stood converted much prior to the year 2008 when

the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008

came into force. Relying on Ext.P6 series of Photographs, the

petitioner would contend that all the surrounding areas are also W.P(C) No.20036 of 2023

converted and well developed with residential and other

buildings.

7. Ext. P5 report of the 1st respondent-Sub collector is

based only on the report given by the Agricultural Officer. It

does not take in the nature of the surrounding areas. It does not

say whether there are paddy lands in or near the property of the

petitioner.

8. Ext.P5 would show that the Agricultural Officer has

found that there are residential buildings around the plot of the

petitioner. The Agricultural Officer advised not to remove the

land from Data Bank for the sole reason that a part of the

property of the petitioner is found waterlogging. This court has

considered the issue of waterlogging in the context of

conversion of land, in Mathar Nagar Residents Association v.

District Collector, Ernakulam [2022 KHC 94] and held that

merely because a part of land is found waterlogged during rainy

season, it cannot be termed as paddy land. W.P(C) No.20036 of 2023

9. For all the above reasons, I find that the Revenue

Divisional Officer shall re-consider the application submitted by

the petitioner. Ext.P5 order is therefore set aside. If the

petitioner submits an application to the Agricultural Officer for

KSREC report paying the prescribed fee within a period of two

weeks and informs the same to the 1st respondent-Sub

Collector, the 1st respondet-Sub Collector shall reconsider the

application and pass appropriate orders afresh within a further

period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of KSREC

report.

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH AMR JUDGE W.P(C) No.20036 of 2023

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20036/2023

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTERED JANMAN DEED NO 1038/2000 DATED 25/03/2000 OF THE KAKKODI SUB REGISTRY.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT NO. BL 605/10 DATED 04/03/2010 ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY, ELATHUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT TO THE PETITIONER.

Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 5 APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 16/04/2021.

Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE INSPECTION REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, ELATHUR TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 27/08/2021.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER PROCEEDING NO. C6-

2528/2020 DATED 11/04/2022.

Exhibit P6 TRUE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE SUBJECT MATTER LAND TAKEN BY THE PETITIONER FROM THE LEFT SIDE OF THE PLOT.

Exhibit P6 (a) TRUE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE SUBJECT MATTER LAND TAKEN BY THE PETITIONER FROM THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE PLOT.

Exhibit P6 (b) TRUE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE SUBJECT MATTER LAND TAKEN BY THE PETITIONER VIEW FROM THE GATE.

Exhibit P6 (c) TRUE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE SUBJECT MATTER LAND TAKEN BY THE PETITIONER FROM THE FRONT ROAD OF THE PLOT.

Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER WITH REFERENCE NO.

DCKKD/11363-2022-L12 DATED 04/01/2023 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER