[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Cicily vs The Revenue Divisional Officer on 16 December, 2025
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
2025:KER:96851
WP(C) NO. 5788 OF 2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA,
1947
WP(C) NO. 5788 OF 2025
PETITIONER/S:
CICILY,
AGED 72 YEARS
D/O URUMESE, PALATTY (H), VAPPALASSEY P.O,
ANGAMALY, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683572
BY ADV SMT.M.S.SHAMLA
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, FORT KOCHI, FORT KOCHI
P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682001
2 THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LR),
COLLECTORATE,CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 682030
3 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
AGRICULTURE OFFICE, NEDUMBASSERY, MEKKAD(P.O),
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683589
4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
NEDUMBASSERY VILLAGE,NEDUMBASSERY, MEKKAD(P.O),
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683589
SMT.PREETHA KK, GP
2025:KER:96851
WP(C) NO. 5788 OF 2025
2
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 16.12.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:96851
WP(C) NO. 5788 OF 2025
3
P.V. KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
--------------------------------
W.P.(C.).No.5788 of 2025
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 16th day of December, 2025
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed with following prayers:
i. Issue a Writ of Certiorari and quash Exhibit P7
order of rejection issued by the 1st respondent after
calling for the records leading to the issuance of the
same.
ii. Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st
respondent to delete an extent of 10 Ares 0 square
meterout of 10 Ares and 12 square meters of
property in Resurvey No.112/17-3of the
4threspondent village from the data bank.
iii. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the 1st
respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders
in Exhibit P4 application submitted in Form no.5 for
correction of the mistake in the data bank
submitted by the petitioner afresh in view of the
relevant provisions and government orders.
iv. Declare that an extent of 10 Ares and 0 square
meter out of the 10 Ares and 12 square meters of
property in Resurvey No. 112/17-3 of the 4th
2025:KER:96851
WP(C) NO. 5788 OF 2025
respondent village is not a land to be included in
the data bank.
v. To dispense with the production of the English
translation of Exhibits which are in vernacular
language.
vi. grant such other reliefs as this Court deems fit in
the facts and circumstances of the case.
(SIC)
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by
the 1st respondent rejecting the Form-5 application submitted
by her under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and
Wetland Rules, 2008 ('Rules', for brevity). The main grievance
of the petitioner is that the authorised officer has not
considered the contentions of the petitioner.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned Government Pleader.
4. This Court perused the impugned order. I am of the
considered opinion that the authorised officer has failed to
comply with the statutory requirements. The impugned order
was passed by the authorised officer solely based on the report
of the Agricultural Officer. There is no indication in the order
that the authorised officer has directly inspected the property or
2025:KER:96851
WP(C) NO. 5788 OF 2025
called for the satellite pictures as mandated under Rule 4(4f) of
the Rules. There is no independent finding regarding the nature
and character of the land as on the relevant date by the
authorised officer. Moreover, the authorised officer has not
considered whether the exclusion of the property would
prejudicially affect the surrounding paddy fields.
5. 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 [2021 (1) KLT 433], observed that the
competent authority 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 merits exclusion from the data bank. The
impugned order is not in accordance with the principle laid
down by this Court in the above judgments. Therefore, I am of
the considered opinion that the impugned order is to be set
aside.
Therefore, this Writ Petition is allowed in the following
2025:KER:96851
WP(C) NO. 5788 OF 2025
manner:
1. Ext.P7 order is set aside.
2. The 1st respondent/authorised officer is
directed to reconsider Ext.P4 Form - 5
application in accordance with the law. The
authorised officer shall either conduct a
personal inspection of the property or,
alternatively, call for the satellite pictures, in
accordance with Rule 4(4f) of the Rules, at the
cost of the petitioner, if not already called for.
3. 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 personally inspect the property,
the application shall be considered and
disposed of within two months from the date of
production of a copy of this judgment by the
petitioner.
4. If the Authorised Officer is either dismissing or
2025:KER:96851
WP(C) NO. 5788 OF 2025
allowing the petition, a speaking order, as
directed by this Court in the judgment dated
05.11.2025 in Vinumon v. District Collector
[2025 (6) KLT 275], shall be passed.
sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
JV
Judgment reserved NA
Date of Judgment 16.12.2025
Judgment dictated 16.12.2025
Draft Judgment placed 16.12.2025
Final Judgment 18.12.2025
uploaded
2025:KER:96851
WP(C) NO. 5788 OF 2025
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 5788 OF 2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.71/1997
DATED 02.12.1997 OF CHENGAMANAD SRO
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX FOR THE YEAR
2022-2023 DATED 07/10/2022 ISSUED BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT IN FAVOR OF THE
PETITIONER
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE DATA
BANK ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED
BY THE PETITIONER IN FORM NO.5 BEARING
APPLICATION NO:4/2022/945687 DATED
22/12/2022
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS
HONORABLE COURT IN WP(C) NO.6204 OF 2023
DATED 27/02/2023
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT IN COC
NO.650/2024 DATED 11/04/2024 OF THIS
HONOURABLE COURT
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REJECTION ORDER ISSUED
BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT BEARING FILE NO.
6626/2024 DATED 26.03.2024
