Kerala High Court
Sheela vs The District Collector,Palakkad on 6 August, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:58595
WP(C) NO. 4758 OF 2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 15TH SRAVANA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 4758 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
SHEELA,
AGED 55 YEARS
D/O.NANCHAN, ERANGAD, PIRAYIRI, PALAKKAD, PIN -
678004
BY ADV SRI.V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL)
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,PALAKKAD,
COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, PALAKKAD, PIN -
678001
2 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION,PALAKKAD, PIN - 678001
3 THE PRINCIPAL AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
CIVIL STATION, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678001
4 THE THAHSILDAR (L.R),
PALAKKAD TALUK OFFICE, PALAKKAD, PALAKKAD, PIN -
678001
5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
PIRAYIRI VILLAGE, PIRAYIRI, PALAKKAD TALUK,
PALAKKAD, PIN - 678004
6 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
KRISHIBHAVAN, PIRAYIRI.P.O,PALAKKAD, PALAKKAD, PIN
- 678004
2025:KER:58595
WP(C) NO. 4758 OF 2025
2
7 LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE,
PIRAYIRI GRAMA PANCHAYAT,PIRAYIRI.P.O, PALAKKAD
TALUK, PALAKKAD.REP.BY ITS CONVENER, PIN - 678004
GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. JESSY S. SALIM
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 06.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:58595
WP(C) NO. 4758 OF 2025
3
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 6th day of August, 2025
The petitioner is the owner in possession of
0.0121 hectares of land comprised in Re-Survey No.
431/1-3 in Block No.19 of Pirayiri Village, Palakkad
Taluk, covered under Ext.P1 possession certificate.
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.P6
application in Form 5, under Rule 4(4d) of the Rules.
However, by Ext.P7 order, the authorised officer has
summarily rejected the application without either
conducting a personal inspection of the land or calling
2025:KER:58595
WP(C) NO. 4758 OF 2025
for the 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
Nair R v. Revenue Divisional Officer [2023 (4) KHC 524],
2025:KER:58595
WP(C) NO. 4758 OF 2025
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.P7 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 report of the
Agricultural Officer without rendering any independent
finding regarding the nature and character of the land
as on the relevant date. There is also no finding whether
the exclusion of the property would prejudicially affect
2025:KER:58595
WP(C) NO. 4758 OF 2025
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.P7 order is quashed.
(ii) The 2nd 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
provided under Rule 4(4f) of the Rules, at the cost of the
petitioner.
(iii) If satellite pictures are called for, the
2025:KER:58595
WP(C) NO. 4758 OF 2025
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/6/8/2025
2025:KER:58595
WP(C) NO. 4758 OF 2025
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4758/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE
DATED 23.10.2024 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE
OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LOCATION SKETCH OF
PETITIONER'S PROPERTY ISSUED BY 6TH
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE
DATA BANK OF THE PETITIONER'S PROPERTY
Exhibit P4 PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PETITIONER'S PROPERTY
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED
17.10.2024 ISSUED FROM PALAKKAD BLOCK
PANCHAYAT
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM.5 APPLICATION
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
2ND RESPONDENT DATED 11.11.2024
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN FILE
NO.107/2025 DATED 22.01.2025 ISSUED BY
THE 2ND RESPONDENT
