Kerala High Court
Arvind Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 21 July, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:54144
WP(C) NO. 35539 OF 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2025 / 30TH ASHADHA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 35539 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
ARVIND KUMAR,
AGED 72 YEARS
S/O. GOVINDALU, DOOR NO. 61/689, M.G. ROAD,
RAVIPURAM, KOCHIN, PIN - 682016
BY ADVS.
SHRI.V.N.HARIDAS
SHRI.SAIFUDEEN T.S
SMT.B.SHAMEERA
SMT.NIMISHAMOL SASIDHARAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM,
COLLECTORATE, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682030
3 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, FIRST FLOOR, K.B.JACOB
ROAD, KOCHI, PIN - 682001
2025:KER:54144
WP(C) NO. 35539 OF 2024
2
4 THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (R.R.),
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, 1ST FLOOR OF CIVIL
STATION, KAKKANAD, PIN - 682030
5 LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER, AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
KRISHI BHAVAN, MINI CIVIL STATION, MAIN ROAD,
THRIPUNITHURA, KOCHI, PIN - 682301
6 AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
KRISHI BHAVAN, MINI CIVIL STATION, MAIN ROAD,
THRIPUNITHURA, KOCHI, PIN - 682301
SMT.VIDYA KURIAKOSE, SR.GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL
HEARING ON 21.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:54144
WP(C) NO. 35539 OF 2024
3
C.S.DIAS, J.
---------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.35539 of 2024
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 21st day of July, 2025
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is the owner in possession of 96
Ares and 55 square metres of land comprised in Survey
No.48/104 and 16 Ares and 20 square metres of land
comprised in Survey No.48/105 of Thekkumbhagam
Village in Kanayannur Taluk, covered under Exts.P1 and
P2 possession certificates. 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.P6 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
2025:KER:54144
WP(C) NO. 35539 OF 2024
impugned Ext.P9 order, the authorised officer has
perfunctorily rejected Ext.P6 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.P9 order is illegal and arbitrary,
and is liable to be quashed.
2. Heard; the learned counsel for the petitioner
and the learned Senior 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
2025:KER:54144
WP(C) NO. 35539 OF 2024
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 Collector,
Ernakulam and others (2021 (1) KLT 433)).
5. Ext.P9 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
2025:KER:54144
WP(C) NO. 35539 OF 2024
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, who in
turn accepted the recommendations 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:
2025:KER:54144
WP(C) NO. 35539 OF 2024
(i) Ext.P9 order is quashed.
(ii) The 3rd respondent/authorised officer is directed
to reconsider Ext.P6 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.P6 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
dkr
2025:KER:54144
WP(C) NO. 35539 OF 2024
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 35539/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE
WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY COMPRISED IN
SY.NO.48/105 DATED 04.03.2023
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE
WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY COMPRISED IN
SY.NO.48/104 DATED 02.03.2023
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT TO THE ADDITIONAL
TAHSILDAR, KANAYANNUR TALUK DIRECTING HIM
TO DUMP THE PILING WASTE INTO THIS
PROPERTY DATED 13.02.2014
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE
ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR PERMITTING THE
CONTRACTING COMPANY TO DUMP PILING WASTE
INTO THIS PROPERTY DATED 04.03.2014
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN WP(C)
NO.7486 OF 2014 DATED 01.04.2014
Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 5 APPLICATION
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED
19.07.2022
Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE 6TH
RESPONDENT DATED 23.01.2018
Exhibit P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE 6TH
RESPONDENT DATED 02.05.2023
Exhibit P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE REJECTION ORDER ISSUED
BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 13.09.2024
Exhibit P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE
KAYANNUR TAHSILDAR (LR) ALLOWING CHANGE
OF SUB-DIVISION DATED 29.09.2018
