Kerala High Court
N Jeena vs The District Collector, Malappuram on 25 July, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:55095
WP(C) NO. 10919 OF 2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
FRIDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 3RD SRAVANA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 10919 OF 2025
PETITIONERS:
1 N JEENA,
AGED 55 YEARS
W/O.N RENJITH, RESIDING AT NARANGA PARAMBATH,P O
BEYPORE, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673015
2 N RENJITH,
AGED 62 YEARS
S/O. ACHUTHAN,RESIDING AT NARANGA PARAMBATH,P O
BEYPORE, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673015
BY ADVS.
SRI.B.PREMNATH (E)
SHRI.SARATH M.S.
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM,
COLLECTORATE, COLLECTORATE ROAD, UPHILL,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676505
2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM, PIN
- 676101
3 THE TAHSILDAR,
TALUK OFFICE, TIRUR TALUK,TIRUR MINI CIVIL STATION
BUILDING, TIRUR.P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN -
676101
2025:KER:55095
WP(C) NO. 10919 OF 2025
2
4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
VILLAGE OFFICE, PARIYAPURAM,TIRUR TALUK,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676302
OTHER PRESENT:
SR.GP.SMT.PREETHA K.K
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 25.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:55095
WP(C) NO. 10919 OF 2025
3
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 25th day of July, 2025
The writ petition is filed to quash Ext.P2 stop
memo and direct the 4th respondent to consider and
pass orders on Exts.P5 explanation and Ext.P9
representation, expeditiously.
2. The petitioners are husband and wife. The 1st
petitioner is the owner in possession of 22.89 Ares of
land comprised in Survey No.32/2-14 in Pariyapuram
Village covered under Ext.P1 land tax receipt. The 1 st
petitioner's property is an unnotified land. It is not
included in the data bank. When the 1st petitioner
attempted to construct a boundary wall, the 4th
respondent has issued Ext.P2 stop memo, directing the
petitioners to stop the construction. Ext.P2 stop memo
is untenable, since the 1st petitioner's property is neither
paddy land nor wetland under the Kerala Conservation of
Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 ('Act' for short).
2025:KER:55095
WP(C) NO. 10919 OF 2025
Therefore, Ext.P2 stop memo is illegal and arbitrary,
especially in view of the law laid down by this Court in
Jessy Abraham v. The Land Revenue Commissioner,
Thiruvananthapuram (2022 (1) KLT 461). Hence, Ext.P2
stop memo may be quashed.
3. In the counter affidavit filed by the 2nd
respondent, it is admitted in unequivocal terms that the
property in question is not included in the data bank, but
is included as 'Nilam' in the revenue records. It is in the
said background that the Village Officer has issued
Ext.P2 stop memo. The Village Officer has also reported
that the property in question is a marshy land with
natural watercourses. The Agricultural Officer has
reported that even though the property is not included in
the data bank, it is swampy and the construction of the
protective wall would obstruct the free flow of the water.
Therefore, the Agricultural Officer has recommended
the property be included in the data bank. Meanwhile,
2025:KER:55095
WP(C) NO. 10919 OF 2025
the petitioners have filed a Form 7 application, seeking
to change the nature of the property in the revenue
records. The final decision in the matter is to be taken
after the receipt of the reports from the Village Officer
and the Agricultural Officer. There is no illegality in
Ext.P2 stop memo
4. Heard; the learned counsel for the petitioners
and the learned Senior Government Pleader.
5. A reading of the counter affidavit filed by the
2nd respondent substantiates that the petitioners'
property is not classified as paddy land or wetland and
not included in the data bank. Even though the
Agricultural Officer has reported that the property is to
be included in the data bank, so far as it is not done, the
provisions of the Act is not applicable to the facts of the
case.
6. It is no longer res-integra in view of the law laid
down by this Court in Shanawaz Mytheenkunju v. Village
2025:KER:55095
WP(C) NO. 10919 OF 2025
Officer, Keerikkad Village (2025(1) KHC 447), that a
Village Officer can issue a stop memo under Section 12
of the Act, only if the property is classified as paddy land
or wetland as defined under the Act.
In view of the admitted facts, I am of the definite
view that Ext.P2 stop memo is untenable. Accordingly, I
quash Ext.P2 stop memo. The petitioners would be at
liberty to use their property as per the provisions of the
Act and Rules. This judgment will not bar the
respondents from taking action to include the property in
the data bank in accordance with law.
SD/-
C.S.DIAS,
JUDGE
rmm25/7/2025
2025:KER:55095
WP(C) NO. 10919 OF 2025
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10919/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT
NO.KL10041700396/2025 OF PARIYAPURAM
VILLAGE FOR THE YEAR 2024-2025 IN THE
NAME OF THE 1ST PETITIONER, 20.01.2025
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE STOP MEMO ISSUED TO 2ND
PETITIONER BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT NUMBER
NIL AND DATED 22.02.2025
Exhibit P3 TRUE TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLANATION
SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER TO THE
2ND RESPONDENT DATED 24.02.2025 ALONG
WITH THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THE 2ND
RESPONDENT DATED 24.02.2025
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BY
THE 2ND PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT
DATED 24.02.2025 ALONG WITH THE
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT
DATED 24.02.2025
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BY
THE 2ND PETITIONER TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT
DATED 24.02.2025 WITH THE ENDORSEMENT OF
THE 4TH RESPONDENT ON 24.02.2025
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION OF THE
2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
DATED 01.03.2025 AND THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT HAVING NUMBER
1467637/25-L3 DATED 01.03.2025
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION OF THE
2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT
DATED 01.03.2025 AND THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 01.03.2025
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION OF THE
2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT
DATED 01.03.2025 AND THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 01.03.2025
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION OF THE
2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT
DATED 01.03.2025
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE ADVOCATE NOTICE ISSUED
BY SRI.DINESH POOKAYIL, ADVOCATE TO ONE
GIRIJA, DATED 05.02.2025
2025:KER:55095
WP(C) NO. 10919 OF 2025
Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY ADVOCATE NOTICE
ISSUED BY SRI.P.T.RAJESH, ADVOCATE TO
SRI.DINESH POOKAYIL, ADVOCATE, DATED
10.02.2025 ALONG WITH THE POSTAL
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DATED 12.02.2025
Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 7 APPLICATION
NO.1/2025/2405732, SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST
PETITIONER, DATED 06.03.2025
