Kerala High Court
Muhammed Shafi vs State Of Kerala on 16 July, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:52563
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 25TH ASHADHA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 43043 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
MUHAMMED SHAFI,
AGED 52 YEARS
S/O. SHAMSUDEEN, RESIDING AT AJMAL NIVAS,
PANAYAMCHERRY, ANCHAL P.O.,
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691306
BY ADV SRI.ANCHAL C.VIJAYAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY IT'S SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
KOLLAM, PIN - 691013
3 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
PUNALUR, KOLLAM, PIN - 691305
4 THE TAHSILDAR,
TALUK OFFICE, PUNALUR,
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691506
5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
VILLAGE OFFICE, EDAMULAKKAL,
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691321
6 THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE,
REPRESENTED BY IT'S CONVENOR-AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
KRISHI BHAVAN, EDAMULAKKAL, EDAYAM P.O.,
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691532
WP(C) NO. 43043 OF 2024
2
2025:KER:52563
7 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
KRISHI BHAVAN,EDAMULAKKAL, ARACKAL, EDAYAM P.O KOLLAM
DISTRICT ( IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 16.07.2025
IN I.A NO. 2 OF 2025 )
OTHER PRESENT:
SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER- SMT.VIDYA KURIAKOSE,
STANDING COUNSEL- SRI.MANOJ RAMASWAMY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 43043 OF 2024
3
2025:KER:52563
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 16th day of July, 2025
The petitioner is the owner in possession of
6.55 Ares of land comprised in Re-Survey No. 66/6 in
Block No. 29 of Edumulakkal Village, Punalur Taluk,
covered under Ext. P1 land tax receipt. The property is
a converted land. It is not suitable for paddy
cultivation. However, the respondents have
erroneously classified the property as 'paddy land' and
included it in the data bank. To exclude the property
from the data bank, the petitioner had submitted Ext.
P4 application in Form 5 under Rule 4(4d) of the
Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules,
2008 ('Rules' in short). But, by the impugned Ext. P5
order, the authorised officer has perfunctorily rejected
Ext. P4 application, without inspecting the property
directly or calling for satellite images as envisaged
under Rule 4(4f) of the Rules. He has also not
WP(C) NO. 43043 OF 2024
2025:KER:52563
rendered any independent finding regarding the nature
and character of the property as on 12.08.2008. Hence,
Ext. P5 order is illegal and arbitrary, and is liable to
be quashed.
2. Heard; the learned counsel for the petitioner
and the learned Government Pleader.
3. The petitioner's specific case is that, his property
is a converted land. It is not suitable for paddy
cultivation. But, the property has been erroneously
classified in the data bank as paddy land. Even though
the petitioner had submitted a Form 5 application, to
exclude the property from the data bank, the same has
been rejected by the authorised officer without any
application of mind.
4. In a host of judicial pronouncements, this
Court has emphatically held that, it is the nature, lie,
character and fitness of the land, and whether the land is
suitable for paddy cultivation as on 12.08.2008 i.e., the
date of coming into force of the Act, are the relevant
WP(C) NO. 43043 OF 2024
2025:KER:52563
criteria to be ascertained by the Revenue Divisional
Officer to exclude a property from the data bank (read
the decisions of 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 and others (2021 (1) KLT 433)).
5. Ext. P5 order establishes that the authorised
officer has not directly inspected the property or called
for the satellite images as envisaged under Rule 4(4f) of
the Rules. He has also not rendered any independent
finding regarding the nature and character of the
property as on 12.08.2008, or whether the removal of
the property from the data bank would adversely affect
the paddy cultivation in the locality. Instead, by solely
relying on the report of the Agricultural Officer, the
impugned order has been passed. Thus, I am satisfied
that the impugned order has been passed without any
WP(C) NO. 43043 OF 2024
2025:KER:52563
application of mind, and the same is liable to be quashed
and the authorised officer be directed to reconsider the
matter afresh, in accordance with law, after adverting to
the principles of law laid down by this Court in the
aforesaid decisions and the materials available on
record.
Accordingly, I allow the writ petition in the
following manner:
(i). Ext. P5 order is quashed.
(ii). The third respondent/authorised officer is
directed to reconsider Ext. P4 application, in
accordance with law. It would be up to the
authorised officer to either directly inspect the
property or call for satellite images, as per the
procedure provided under Rule 4(4f), at the
expense of the petitioner.
(iii) If the authorised officer calls for the
satellite images, he shall consider Ext. P4
application, in accordance with law and as
WP(C) NO. 43043 OF 2024
2025:KER:52563
expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three
months from the date of the receipt of the satellite
images. In case he directly inspects the property,
he shall dispose of the application within two
months from the date of production of a copy of this
judgment.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
mtk/16.07.25
WP(C) NO. 43043 OF 2024
2025:KER:52563
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 43043/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBITP1 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT NO. KL-
02060806060/2023 DATED 07.07.2023 ISSUED
BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE
NO.80662422 DATED 23.09.2023 ISSUED BY
THE 5TH RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE
DATA BANK PREPARED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT
AND NOTIFIED IN THE KERALA GAZETTE
NO.595/02/GP-30 DATED 19.03.2012 SHOWING
THE DESCRIPTION OF THE LAND OWNED BY THE
PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY
THE PETITIONER IN FORM NO.5 DATED
03.10.2023
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE 3RD
RESPONDENT VIDE NO.1330/2024 DATED
01.11.2024
EXHIBIT-P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOS SHOWING THE
PRESENT POSITION OF LAND OWNED BY THE
PETITIONER IN RE SURVEY NO.66/6 IN BLOCK
NO.29 OF EDAMULAKKAL VILLAGE
