Kerala High Court
Beerankutty, S/O. Ibrahimkutty Haji vs State Of Kerala ,Represented on 4 August, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:57868
WP(C) NO. 32832 OF 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
MONDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 13TH SRAVANA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 32832 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
BEERANKUTTY, S/O. IBRAHIMKUTTY HAJI,
AGED 65 YEARS
ELUMBILAKKATTIL HOUSE,KUTTIKADAVU, CHERUPPA P.O,
MAVOOR KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673661
BY ADVS.
SHRI.K.J.MANU RAJ
SMT.K.VINAYA
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA ,REPRESENTED
BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673020
3 THE TAHSILDAR(LR),
TALUK OFFICE KOZHIKODE ERANHIPPALAM, KOZHIKODE,
PIN - 673020
4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
MAVOOR VILLAGE KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673661
5 AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
KRISHI BHAVAN, MAVOOR BLOCK PANCHAYAT OFFICE
2025:KER:57868
WP(C) NO. 32832 OF 2024
2
COMPOUND,MAVOOR P.O., KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673661
6 DEPUTY COLLECTOR (RR),
COLLECTORATE , CIVIL STATION P.O,KOZHIKODE, PIN -
673575
OTHER PRESENT:
GP.SMT.DEEPA V
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 04.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:57868
WP(C) NO. 32832 OF 2024
3
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 4th day of August, 2025
The petitioner is the owner in possession of
49.01 Ares of land comprised in Re-Survey Nos.46/4,
and 46/6 of Mavoor Village, Kozhikode Taluk, covered
under 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 Ext.P4 application in
Form 5, under Rule 4(4d) of the Rules. However, by
Ext.P5 order, the authorised officer has summarily
rejected the application without either conducting a
personal inspection of the land or calling for the
2025:KER:57868
WP(C) NO. 32832 OF 2024
satellite pictures as mandated under Rule 4(4f) of the
Rules. Furthermore, the order is devoid of any
independent finding regarding the nature and
character of the land as it existed on 12.08.2008 - the
date the Act came into force. The impugned order,
therefore, is arbitrary and unsustainable in law and
liable to be quashed.
2. I have heard the learned Counsel for the
petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.
3. The petitioner's 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.
4. It is now well-settled by a catena of judgments of
this Court - including the decisions in Muraleedharan
2025:KER:57868
WP(C) NO. 32832 OF 2024
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 [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.
5. 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 personally inspected the
property or called for the satellite pictures as mandated
under Rule 4(4f) of the Rules. Instead, the authorised
officer has merely acted upon the reports of the
respondents 4 and 5, without rendering any independent
finding regarding the nature and character of the land
2025:KER:57868
WP(C) NO. 32832 OF 2024
as on the relevant date. There is also no finding whether
the exclusion of the property would prejudicially affect
the surrounding paddy fields. In light of the above
findings, I hold that the impugned order was passed in
contravention of the statutory mandate and the law laid
down by this Court. Thus, the impugned order is vitiated
due to 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 6th respondent/authorised officer is directed
to reconsider the Form 5 application, in accordance with
the law, by either conducting a personal inspection of
the property or calling for the satellite pictures as
2025:KER:57868
WP(C) NO. 32832 OF 2024
provided under Rule 4(4f) of the Rules, at the cost of the
petitioner.
(iii) If satellite pictures are called for, the
application shall be disposed of within three months
from the date of receipt of such pictures. On the other
hand, if the authorised officer opts to inspect the
property personally, the application shall be disposed of
within two months from the date of production of a copy
of this judgment by the petitioner.
The writ petition is thus ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
rmm/4/8/2025
2025:KER:57868
WP(C) NO. 32832 OF 2024
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 32832/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF
DOCUMENT DATED 31.5.1996
Exhibit P 1 [ a ] A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF
DOCUMENT DATED 27.9.2002
Exhibit P 1 [ b ] A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF
DOCUMENT DATED 18.5.2005
Exhibit P 2 A TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT
NO.KL11O13OO9634/2O24 DATED 9.8.2024
ISSUED BY THE LAND REVENUE DEPARTMENT
Exhibit P 3 A TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION
CERTIFICATE DATED 9.8.2024 ISSUED BY THE
4TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P 4 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED
IN FORM NO.5 DATED 9.6.2022
Exhibit P 5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 25.9.2023
[ FILE NO. 387O/2023 ] ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P 6 A TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH ISSUED BY THE
SURVEYOR IN RESPECT OF PROPERTY IN SY NO
46/6 INCLUDED IN DOCUMENT NO. 1402/1996
DATED 22.8.2024
Exhibit P 6 [a ] A TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH ISSUED BY THE
SURVEYOR IN RESPECT OF PROPERTY IN SY NO
46/6 INCLUDED IN DOCUMENT NO. 1760/2005
DATED 22.8.2024
Exhibit P 6 [ b ] A TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH ISSUED BY THE
SURVEYOR IN RESPECT OF PROPERTY IN SY NO
46/4 INCLUDED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2485/2002
DATED 22.8.2024
