Kerala High Court
Ismayil, S/O. Sharafudheen vs The District Collector on 25 July, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:55093
WP(C) NO. 30412 OF 2024
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. 30412 OF 2024
PETITIONERS:
1 ISMAYIL, S/O. SHARAFUDHEEN,
AGED 35 YEARS
THARADIKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, THALAKKAD, B P ANGADI
P.O, KATTACHIRA, THALAKKAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 676102
2 SHAHALA SHEREEN. P,
AGED 32 YEARS
W/O. ISMAYIL, THARADIKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, THALAKKAD,
B P ANGADI P.O, KATTACHIRA, THALAKKAD, MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 676102
BY ADV SMT. ARYA ASHOKAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
COLLECTORATE MALAPPURAM, CIVIL STATION, UP HILL,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676505
2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
TIRUR REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, TIRUR-
THRIKANDIYOOR ROAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN -
676101
3 THE THAHSILDAR (LR),
TIRUR TALUK OFFICE, MINI CIVIL STATION BUILDING,
TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676101
4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
THALAKKAD VILLAGE OFFICE, KOLOOPALAM, TIRUR,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676102
2025:KER:55093
WP(C) NO. 30412 OF 2024
2
5 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
THALAKKAD KRISHI BHAVAN, THALAKKAD, MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 676102
OTHER PRESENT:
GP.SMT.JESSY S. SALIM
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 25.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:55093
WP(C) NO. 30412 OF 2024
3
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 25th day of July, 2025
The writ petition is filed to quash Exts.P6 and P7
orders and restore Ext.P5 order expeditiously.
2. The petitioners are the owners in possession
of 1 Are and 67 Sq. Metres of land comprised in Survey
No.186/10-9 of Thalakkad Village, Tirur Taluk covered
under Ext.P1 land tax receipt. The property is a
'converted land' and is not suitable for paddy cultivation.
Nevertheless, the respondents have erroneously
classified the same as 'paddy land' and included it in the
data bank maintained under the Kerala Conservation of
Paddy Land and Wetland Act and Rules, 2008 ('Act and
Rules' in short). To exclude the property from the data
bank, the petitioners have submitted Ext.P3 application
in Form 5 under Rule 4(4d) of the Rules. By Ext.P5
order, based on Ext.P4 report of the 5 th respondent, the
2025:KER:55093
WP(C) NO. 30412 OF 2024
2nd respondent/authorised officer has allowed Ext.P3
application. Surprisingly, two months after the passing of
Ext.P5 order, the 2nd respondent has issued Ext.P6 order
and consequently Ext.P7 order. In Nikkie Varughese John
v. Revenue Divisional Officer/Sub-Collector, Muvattupuzha
[2024 (2) KHC 499], this Court has succinctly held that
the Revenue Divisional Officer has no power to review
his own order. Notwithstanding the above declaration of
law, the 2nd respondent has passed impugned Exts.P6
and P7 orders. Ext.P6 and P7 orders are erroneous and
are liable to be quashed.
3. In the counter affidavit filed by the 2 nd
respondent, it is candidly admitted that the petitioners'
Form 5 application was allowed by Ext.P4 order. But,
subsequently, the 2nd respondent received numerous
complaints against the allowing of the application. The
property was converted after 2008 and is a waterlogged
area. Based on the said complaints and Ext.R2(b) joint
committee inspection report, Exts.P6 and P7 orders were
2025:KER:55093
WP(C) NO. 30412 OF 2024
passed. There is no illegality in Exts.P6 and P7 orders.
4 Heard; the learned Counsel for the petitioners
and the learned Government Pleader.
5. It is not in dispute that, Ext.P3 application
submitted by the petitioners was allowed by the 2 nd
respondent as per Ext.P5 order, on the strength of
Ext.P4 report of the 5th respondent/Agricultural Officer.
In Ext.P4 report, the 5th respondent has explicitly stated
that the petitioners' property is not suitable for paddy
cultivation and can be excluded from the data bank.
6. However, purportedly on the basis of the
complaints received from third parties, the 2 nd
respondent allegedly conducted a inspection and passed
Exts.P6 and P7 orders, suo motu reviewing and recalling
Ext.P5 order. In Nikkie Varughese John' s case(supra) this
Court has categorically held that the authorised officer
has no power to review his own order. If at all the
revenue authorities were aggrieved by Ext.P5 order, they
should have to workedout their remedies in accordance
2025:KER:55093
WP(C) NO. 30412 OF 2024
with law, especially when there is no power of review
conferred on the authorised officer. In view of the
exposition of law in the aforecited decision, and the fact
that the 2nd respondent had already allowed the
petitioners' Form 5 application, I am of the view that
Exts.P6 and P7 orders stand vitiated due to errors of law
and are untenable.
In the aforesaid circumstances, I allow the writ
petition by quashing Exts.P6 and P7 orders and
resurrecting Ext.P5 order. It would be upto the
petitioners to seek for change of nature of the property
as per the procedure contemplated under the Act and
Rules. Nonetheless, it is clarified that this judgment will
not stand in the way of the revenue challenging Ext.P5
order in accordance with law.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
rmm/25/7/2025
2025:KER:55093
WP(C) NO. 30412 OF 2024
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 30412/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit-P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT BEARING NO.
KL10042402661/2023 DATED 04-04-2023
Exhibit-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE
PUBLISHED DATA BANK OF THALAKKAD GRAMA
PANCHAYATH DATED 27-02-2012
Exhibit-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 5 APPLICATION
SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE
THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 01-06-2023
Exhibit-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE
5TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT
DATED 23-06-2023
Exhibit-P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING
FILENO.2148/2023 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 29-07-
Exhibit-P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.
RDOTIR/2246/2023-F5 DATED 07-09-2023
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit-P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING FILE NO.
356/2024 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
DATED 23-02-2024
RESPONDENT EXHIBITS
Exhibit R2(a) True copy of the complaint
Exhibit R2(b) True copy of the report submitted by the
Joint Committee
