Kerala High Court
Sheeba vs State Of Kerala on 23 July, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
WP(C) NO. 39969 OF 2023 1 2025:KER:54762
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JULY 2025 / 1ST SRAVANA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 39969 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
SHEEBA
AGED 42 YEARS
W/O. ANZMON, FADI VILLA, PALLICKAL, PALLICKAL
VILLAGE, CHIRAYINKEEZH TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 695604
BY ADV SRI.ANCHAL C.VIJAYAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
COLLECTORATE, KOLLAM, PIN - 691013
3 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PUNALUR,
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691305
4 THE TAHSILDAR,
TALUK OFFICE, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN -
691506
5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
VILLAGE OFFICE, CHADAYAMANGALAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN
- 691534
6 THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE,
WP(C) NO. 39969 OF 2023 2 2025:KER:54762
CHADAYAMANGALAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS
CONVENOR-AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN,
CHADAYAMANGALAM P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691534
SR.GP.SMT.PREETHA K.K
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 39969 OF 2023 3 2025:KER:54762
C.S.DIAS, J.
---------------------------------------
WP(C) No. 39969 OF 2023
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 23rd day of July, 2025
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is the owner in possession of 14.5
Ares of land comprised in Re-Survey No.179/19 in Block
No.42 of Chadayamangalam Village, Kottarakara 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.P5 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.P10
order, the authorised officer has perfunctorily rejected
Ext.P5 application, without inspecting the property directly
or calling for satellite images as envisaged under Rule 4(4f)
WP(C) NO. 39969 OF 2023 4 2025:KER:54762
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.P10 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, her 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 criteria to be
WP(C) NO. 39969 OF 2023 5 2025:KER:54762
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.P10 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 application of mind, and the same
WP(C) NO. 39969 OF 2023 6 2025:KER:54762
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.P10 order is quashed.
(ii). The 3rd respondent/authorised officer is
directed to reconsider Ext.P5 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.P5 application, in
accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible,
at any rate, within three months from the date of the
WP(C) NO. 39969 OF 2023 7 2025:KER:54762
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
SCB.23.07.25.
WP(C) NO. 39969 OF 2023 8 2025:KER:54762
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 39969/2023
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT NO. KL-
02042501991/2021 DATED 16.03.2021 ISSUED BY
THE 5TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE
NO.63419198 DATED 18.02.2022 ISSUED BY THE
5TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P3 TRUE PHOTOS SHOWING THE NATURE OF THE LAND
OWNED BY THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE DATA
BANK PREPARED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT SHOWING
THE DESCRIPTION OF THE LAND OWNED BY THE
PETITIONER.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY
THE PETITIONER IN FORM NO.5 DATED
28.02.2022.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF
THE 6TH RESPONDENT HELD ON 16.06.2022.
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM
THE OFFICE OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT SHOWING
THE STATUS OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY
THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT NO. A
-172/2015/K.S.R.E.C IN RESPECT OF THE LAND
IN RE.SY.NO. 179/19 IN BLOCK NO. 42 OF
CHADAYAMANGALAM VILLAGE.
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 13.11.2023
IN W.P.(C) NO.13513/2023 OF THE HON'BLE
HIGH COURT OF KERALA.
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED
03.03.2023 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN
FILE NO.111/2023.
