Kerala High Court
Ajith.K.S, S/O. K.L.Sajayan vs State Of Kerala on 17 July, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:52918
WP(C) NO. 26443 OF 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 26TH ASHADHA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 26443 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
AJITH.K.S, S/O. K.L.SAJAYAN,
AGED 27 YEARS
KANNAGARA HOUSE, OOKKOTTUMANNA. P.O.,
CHUNGARTHARA, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 679334
BY ADVS.
SRI.LINDONS C.DAVIS
SRI.G.S.SAJI
SMT.E.U.DHANYA
SMT.N.S.SHAMILA
SMT.CHINJU P. JOYIES
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF
AGRICULTURE AND FARMERS WELFARE, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
COLLECTORATE, MALAPPURAM, COLLECTORATE ROAD, UP
HILL, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676505
3 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, PERINTHALMANNA, NEAR
MINI CIVIL STATION,MALAPPURAM, PIN - 679322
4 DEPUTY COLLECTOR (D.M),
COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, MALAPPURAM, PIN -
676505
2025:KER:52918
WP(C) NO. 26443 OF 2024
2
5 LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE,
(REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER AGRICULTURAL OFFICER)
KRISHI BHAVAN, NILAMBUR, MANALODY, MALAPPURAM, PIN
- 679329
6 AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
KRISHI BHAVAN, NILAMBUR, MANALODY, MALAPPURAM, PIN
- 679329
7 TAHSILDAR,
TALUK OFFICE, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 679329
8 VILLAGE OFFICER,
VILLAGE OFFICE, NILAMBUR, MANALODY, MALAPPURAM,
PIN - 679329
SR.GP SMT. VIDYA KURIKOSE
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 17.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:52918
WP(C) NO. 26443 OF 2024
3
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 17th day of July, 2025
The petitioner is the owner in possession of
3.77 Ares of land comprised in Survey No.165/5-4 in
Nilambur Village, Malappuram District, 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.P3 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.P4 order, the 3 rd respondent has
perfunctorily rejected Ext.P3 application, without
directly inspecting the property. Even though the 6 th
2025:KER:52918
WP(C) NO. 26443 OF 2024
respondent had called for Ext.P5 report from the
Kerala State Remote Sensing and Environment Centre
(KSREC), the same was not considered by the 3 rd
respondent. He has also not rendered any
independent finding regarding the nature and
character of the property as on 12.08.2008. Hence,
Ext. P4 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
2025:KER:52918
WP(C) NO. 26443 OF 2024
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
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.P4 order establishes that the authorised
officer has not directly inspected the property. Even
though Ext.P5 KSREC report was received on 8.12.2022,
the 3rd respondent has passed Ext.P4 order on
14.12.2022, without considering Ext.P5 report. He has
also not rendered any independent finding regarding the
nature and character of the property as on 12.08.2008,
2025:KER:52918
WP(C) NO. 26443 OF 2024
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, who in turn has relied on the
recommendation of the Local Level Monitoring
Committee, the impugned order has been passed. Thus,
I am satisfied that the impugned order has been passed
without any 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.P4 order is quashed.
(ii). The 3rd respondent/authorised officer is
directed to reconsider Ext.P3 application either by
directly inspecting the property or referring to
2025:KER:52918
WP(C) NO. 26443 OF 2024
Ext.P5 report. The entire exercise shall be
completed within three months from the date of
production of a copy of this judgment.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
rmm/17/7/2025
2025:KER:52918
WP(C) NO. 26443 OF 2024
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26443/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED
01.05.2023 ISSUED BY THE NILAMBUR
VILLAGE OFFICE
Exhibit P2 A COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE DATA
BANK PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL GAZETTE ON
08.03.2021
Exhibit P3 A COPY OF THE FORM.5 APPLICATION DATED
09.08.2021 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
14.12.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P5 A COPY OF THE KSREC REPORT ALONG WITH
COVERING LETTER
NO.A-172/2015/KSREC/007615/22 DATED
08.12.2022
