[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Alvin Medicare Private Ltd vs The Deputy Collector (Rr) Rdo Kozhikode on 17 December, 2025
Author: A.Muhamed Mustaque
Bench: A.Muhamed Mustaque
WA NO. 3039 OF 2025 1 2025:KER:97336
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISANKAR V. MENON
WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA,
1947
WA NO. 3039 OF 2025
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 03.12.2025 IN WP(C)
NO.25745 OF 2025 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT/PETITIONER :
ALVIN MEDICARE PRIVATE LTD.
5/3429. 1ST FLOOR, C BLOCK, BABY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL
PUTHIYARA P.O., KOZHIKODE REPRESENTED BY ITS
DIRECTOR - VINEETH ABRAHAM, PIN - 673004
BY ADVS.
SHRI.M.SASINDRAN
SHRI.MRINAL CHAND M.
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS :
1 THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (RR) RDO KOZHIKODE
CIVIL STATION P.O.,
KOZHIKODE, KERALA,
PIN - 673020
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE
WAYANAD ROAD,
CIVIL STATION, ERANHIPPALAM,
KOZHIKODE, KERALA, PIN - 673020
WA NO. 3039 OF 2025 2 2025:KER:97336
3 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 691001
SMT RAJI T BHASKAR, GP
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
17.12.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WA NO. 3039 OF 2025 3 2025:KER:97336
JUDGMENT
A.Muhamed Mustaque, J.
The appellant was the writ petitioner. The appellant
purchased land comprised in Sy.No.1221/12 of Kasaba Village,
Kozhikode Taluk, Kozhikode District, having an extent of 17.96
Ares. This land was described as garden land in Ext.P2 in the
year 1945. Another document of the year 1966 shows that there
were three tenants and that the land was described as 'thottam'.
However, in the revenue records, the land continued to be shown
as 'nilam'. The case of the appellant is that the land has been
converted much prior to 1967 and, therefore, they are entitled to
the benefit of Section 27A of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy
Land and Wetland Act, 2008 ('the Act' in short). Rule 12(13) of
the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008
('the Rules' in short) prescribes the procedure for effecting
conversion of such land in the Revenue Records. It is appropriate
to refer to Rule 12(13) of the Rules, which is reproduced herein;
"1967 ല ജല 4-ആ ത യത ക മൻപ ന കതയതത
ന കനതത ആയ ഭമ യല സ ഭ വ വ ത യ ന സ ബന ചള അതപക ഫ റ 9
-ൽ സമർപ തകണത പസത ഭമ 1967 ജല 4-ആ ത യത ക മൻപ
WA NO. 3039 OF 2025 4 2025:KER:97336
ന കതയതത ന കനതത ആല/ന ലതള യകനത ന യ പസത ഭമ ലയ
സ ബന കന ത ല2 പറയന ത3ഖകൾ ലതള വ യ സ ക3ക വനത /,
അത യത:-
(i) അപക 3മള ഭമ 1967 ജല 4-ന മൻപ ന കനത തയ മറ
ക ർഷ തകത3 ആവശ ങൾക യ ഉപതയ ഗചടളത തയ പസ വചടള
ആധ 3തലA പകർപകൾ അലCങ ൽ;
(ii) അപക 3മള ഭമ യൽ 1967 ജല 4-ന മൻപ ന കനത തയ മറ
ക ർഷ തകത3 ആവശ ങൾക യ ഉപതയ ഗചടളത തയ
പസ വചടള/ത3ഖലപടതയടള മദപതതൽ തയ റ കയടള
ന യമ നസത ഉ മ കൾ (ഒറ , ക / ത ങയവയത ത ഉൾപല );
(iii) അപക 3മള ഭമ 1967 ജല 4-ന മൻപ ന വലണ യരന
ലകട തന തതPശ സ യ ഭ3/ സ പനതൽ ലകട ന കത അ ചത ലA
3സത; അലCങ ൽ
(iv) അപക 3മള ഭമ 1967 ജല 4-ന മൻപ ന കനത തയ മറ
ക ർഷ തകത3 ആവശ ങൾക യ ഉപതയ ഗചടളത യ ലതള യകന ത3തൽ
ഏലതങ ല സർക ർ ഉതT ഗസതന , സർക ർ ഏജൻസകതള നൽക യ
ല സൻതസ മറ ത3ഖകതള ;
(v) വജ പന ലWയലപ ത ഭമ യല സ ഭ വ വ ത യ ന സ ബന ച
സമർപ ചടള അതപകയൽ വ കമ കയടള ഭമ യലള മ3ങൾ, വടകൾ,
പ3 തനമ യ ക വകൾ, എടപ എനവയല പ യ ക പ2ക എനവയല
അ സ നതല അത നനസതമ യ ഉള സ ക ലമ 2 കതള "
2. The Village Officer's report also indicates that the land
was converted much prior to 1967. The sufficiency of this
document to invoke Section 27A of the Act, however, remains a
question.
WA NO. 3039 OF 2025 5 2025:KER:97336
3. The learned Single Judge, who considered the matter,
found merit in the appellant's contention and relegated the matter
to the Appellate Authority. It is in these circumstances that the
appellant has approached this Court. Rule 12(13) of the Rules
stipulates the procedure for arriving at a satisfaction with regard
to such conversion or reclamation before 04.07.1967. When the
documents indicate compliance with the Rule, the authority
cannot disregard the prescribed procedure and arrive at a
different conclusion. The very stipulation of such a procedure in
the Rule is to ensure a definite and uniform outcome in all such
cases. Any Revenue Divisional Officer, while considering an
application in Form 9, is required to strictly follow the procedure
prescribed to arrive at such a conclusion. Apart from the
documents referred to under Rule 12(13), the report of the Village
Officer also fortifies the case of the appellant.
4. In such circumstances, relegating the appellant to
invoke the appellate remedy is unwarranted, inasmuch as the
order now passed is contrary to the procedure contemplated
under Rule 12(13). It is to be noted that the documents of the
year 1945 as well as 1966 clearly establish, by their recitals, that
WA NO. 3039 OF 2025 6 2025:KER:97336
the land had already been converted.
5. In such circumstances, we are of the view that the
Ext.P13 impugned order of the Deputy Collector(RR) is liable to be
set aside and that the application filed by the petitioner in Form 9
is to be allowed. Accordingly, the impugned order of the Deputy
Collector(RR) is set aside. The impugned judgment setting aside
Ext.P17 is affirmed. The Deputy Collector(RR) is directed to pass
fresh orders, in the light of the above, allowing the application in
Form 9. The needful shall be done within a period of two weeks.
This Writ Appeal is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
JUDGE
Sd/-
HARISANKAR V. MENON
JUDGE
rkj
