Tuesday, 21, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Lakshmi Devi. V vs The District Collector
2025 Latest Caselaw 1156 Ker

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 1156 Ker
Judgement Date : 18 July, 2025

Kerala High Court

Lakshmi Devi. V vs The District Collector on 18 July, 2025

Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
WP(C) NO. 40012 OF 2024
                                   1


                                                        2025:KER:53585

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

                   THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS

        FRIDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 27TH ASHADHA, 1947

                        WP(C) NO. 40012 OF 2024

PETITIONER/S:

            LAKSHMI DEVI. V.,
            AGED 58 YEARS
            W/O. K.N ANANDA KUMAR, RESIDING AT VARIYATH HOUSE,
            THENAMKUNNU, MANKAVU P.O, MANKAVU SOUTH, KOZHIKODE
            DISTRICT, PIN - 673007


            BY ADV SMT. ARYA ASHOKAN


RESPONDENT/S:

    1       THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
            KOZHOKODE COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, WAYANAD ROAD,
            ERANHIPPALAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673020

    2       THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
            KOZHIKODE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, KOZHOKODE
            COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, WAYANAD ROAD,
            ERANHIPPALAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673020

    3       THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (RR),
            KOZHOKODE COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, WAYANAD ROAD,
            ERANHIPPALAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673020

    4       THE THAHSILDAR,
            KOZHIKODE TALUK OFFICE, KOZHOKODE COLLECTORATE, CIVIL
            STATION, WAYANAD ROAD, ERANHIPPALAM, KOZHIKODE
            DISTRICT, PIN - 673020

    5       THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
            OLAVANN VILLAGE OFFICE, OLAVANNA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,
            PIN - 673014

    6       THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
            OLAVANNA KRISHI BHAVAN, GURUVAYOORAPPAN COLLEGE,
 WP(C) NO. 40012 OF 2024
                                 2


                                                       2025:KER:53585

          OLAVANNA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673014

    7     THE DIRECTOR,
          KERALA STATE REMOTE SENSING AND ENVIRONMENT CENTRE
          (KSREC), 1ST FLOOR, VIKAS BHAVAN, NEAR LEGISLATIVE
          ASSEMBLY, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA SENATE HOUSE CAMPUS,
          PMG, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695033



OTHER PRESENT:

          SR.GP.SMT.PREETHA K.K., SC- SRI.VISHNU S.
          CHEMPAZHANTHIYIL


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
18.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 40012 OF 2024
                                     3


                                                               2025:KER:53585

                               C.S.DIAS, J.
                    ---------------------------------------
                   WP(C) No. 40012 OF 2024
                   -----------------------------------------
               Dated this the 18th day of July, 2025

                             JUDGMENT

The petitioner is the owner in possession of 5 Ares 33

Sq.Mt. of land, comprised in Survey No.103/96 in Olavanna

Village, Kozhikode Taluk, covered under Ext.P1 land tax

receipt. The property is a garden 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 an 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.P3

order, the authorised officer has perfunctorily rejected the

Form 5 application, without inspecting the property directly

or calling for 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. Hence, Ext.P3 order is illegal and arbitrary, and WP(C) NO. 40012 OF 2024

2025:KER:53585

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, her property is a

garden 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 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 WP(C) NO. 40012 OF 2024

2025:KER:53585

Collector, Ernakulam and others (2021 (1) KLT 433)).

5. Ext.P3 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 Village Officer,

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.P3 order is quashed.

(ii) The 2nd respondent/authorised officer is directed to WP(C) NO. 40012 OF 2024

2025:KER:53585

reconsider the Form 5 application submitted by the

petitioner, 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 the Form 5 application, in

accordance with law, and as 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 rkc/18.07.25 WP(C) NO. 40012 OF 2024

2025:KER:53585

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 40012/2024

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT BEARING NO.

KL11013703700/2024 DATED 08.04.2024 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE DRAFT DATA BANK Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 13.03.2023 BEARING FILE NO. RDOKKD/2210/2022-C5 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IDRC

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter