Kerala High Court
Rekha.M.S , D/O. Prof. M.K. Sanoo vs State Of Kerala , Represented By on 7 August, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:59246
WP(C) NO. 34513 OF 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
THURSDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 16TH SRAVANA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 34513 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
REKHA.M.S , D/O. PROF. M.K. SANOO,
AGED 63 YEARS
RESIDING AT MANGALATH HOUSE, P.O. THRIKKAKKARA,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682022
BY ADVS.
SHRI.V.N.HARIDAS
SHRI.SAIFUDEEN T.S
SMT.B.SHAMEERA
SMT.NIMISHAMOL SASIDHARAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA , REPRESENTED BY
THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF
AGRICULTURE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM
COLLECTORATE, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682030
3 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER ,
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, FIRST FLOOR, K.B.JACOB
ROAD, KOCHI, PIN - 682001
2025:KER:59246
WP(C) NO. 34513 OF 2024
2
4 LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE ,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
AGRICULTURAL OFFICE, KUNNUMPURAM, VAZHAKKALA,
KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682030
5 AGRICULTURAL OFFICER ,
AGRICULTURAL OFFICE, KUNNUMPURAM, VAZHAKKALA,
KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682030
SMT.PREETHA K.K., SR.GP.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL
HEARING ON 07.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:59246
WP(C) NO. 34513 OF 2024
3
C.S.DIAS, J.
---------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.34513 of 2024
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 7th day of August, 2025
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is the owner in possession of 6 Ares
and 76 sq.m. of land comprised in Survey No.849/11-4 in
Thrikkakkara North Village in Kanayannur Taluk,
covered under Ext.P1 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.P-3 application in Form 5, under Rule
4(4d) of the Rules. However, by Ext.P5 order, the
2025:KER:59246
WP(C) NO. 34513 OF 2024
authorised officer has summarily rejected the application
without either conducting a personal inspection of the
land or calling 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
2025:KER:59246
WP(C) NO. 34513 OF 2024
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], 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
2025:KER:59246
WP(C) NO. 34513 OF 2024
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 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
2025:KER:59246
WP(C) NO. 34513 OF 2024
writ petition in the following manner:
(i) Ext.P5 order is quashed.
(ii) The 3rd respondent/authorised officer is directed to
reconsider the Form 5, 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 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
dkr
2025:KER:59246
WP(C) NO. 34513 OF 2024
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 34513/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED
24.08.2022
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE
DATED 24.08.2022 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE
OFFICE
EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 5 APPLICATION
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER THROUGH
ONLINE ON 18.10.2023
EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS
HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C).NO.43585 OF 2023
DATED 22.12.2023
EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE REJECTION ORDER ISSUED
BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 07.08.2024
