Kerala High Court
Jameela ,W/O Ali vs The District Collector, Ernakulam on 29 July, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
WP(C) NO. 4647 OF 2025
1
2025:KER:56185
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
TUESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 7TH SRAVANA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 4647 OF 2025
PETITIONER/S:
JAMEELA ,W/O ALI,
AGED 65 YEARS
PLACHERY , EDATHALA PO, POOKATTUPADY, ERNAKULAM, PIN -
683561
BY ADV SHRI.N.KRISHNA RAJA MAULI
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM
COLLECTORATE,FIRST FLOOR, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682030
2 THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LR),
COLLECTORATE, FIRST FLOOR, CIVIL STATION,KAKKANAD,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682030
3 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
MUVATTUPUZHA, GROUND FLOOR, PATTIMATTOM - MUVATTUPUZHA
ROAD, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686673
4 THE TAHSILDAR (LR),
KUNNATHUNAD TALUK, TALUK OFFICE, KUNNATHUNAD,
PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683543
5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
KIZHAKKAMBALAM VILLAGE OFFICE, KIZHAKKAMBALAM P.O.,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683562
6 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
KIZHAKKAMBALAM KRISHI BHAVAN,KIZHAKKAMBALAM P.O.,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683562
WP(C) NO. 4647 OF 2025
2
2025:KER:56185
OTHER PRESENT:
GP.SRI.K.M.FAISAL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
29.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 4647 OF 2025
3
2025:KER:56185
C.S.DIAS, J.
---------------------------------------
WP(C) No. 4647 OF 2025
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 29th day of July, 2025
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is the owner in possession of 3 Ares 53
Sq. Mt. of land comprised in Survey No.99/1 in Block No.25 in
Kizhakkambalam Village, Kunnathunadu Taluk, covered under
Ext.P1 land tax receipt. The property is a dry land and is
unsuitable for paddy cultivation. Nevertheless, the
respondents have erroneously classified the property as
'paddy land' and included it in the data bank maintained under
the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act,
2008, and the Rules framed thereunder ('Act' and 'Rules', for
brevity). To exclude the property from the data bank, the
petitioner had submitted Ext.P3 application in Form 5, under
Rule 4(4d) of the Rules. However, by Ext.P4 order, the
authorised officer has summarily rejected the application
without either conducting a personal inspection of the land or
calling for the satellite pictures as mandated under Rule 4(4f)
of the Rules. Furthermore, the order is devoid of any
WP(C) NO. 4647 OF 2025
2025:KER:56185
independent finding regarding the nature and character of the
land as it existed on 12.08.2008 -- the date the Act came into
force. The impugned order, therefore, is arbitrary and
unsustainable in law and liable to be quashed.
2. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and
the learned Government Pleader.
3. The petitioner's principal contention is that the applied
property is not a cultivable paddy field but is a converted plot.
Nonetheless, the property has been incorrectly included in the
data bank. Despite filing the Form 5 application, the
authorised officer has rejected the same without proper
consideration or application of mind.
4. It is now well-settled by a catena of judgments of this
Court -- including the decisions 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 [2021 (1) KLT 433] -- that the authorised officer is
obliged to assess the nature, lie and character of the land and
its suitability for paddy cultivation as on 12.08.2008, which
WP(C) NO. 4647 OF 2025
2025:KER:56185
are the decisive criteria to determine whether the property is
to be excluded from the data bank.
5. A reading of Ext.P4 order reveals that the authorised
officer has failed to comply with the statutory requirements.
There is no indication in the order that the authorised officer
has personally inspected the property or called for the satellite
pictures as mandated under Rule 4(4f) of the Rules. Instead,
the authorised officer has merely acted upon the report of the
Agricultural Officer without rendering any independent
finding regarding the nature and character of the land as on
the relevant date. There is also no finding whether the
exclusion of the property would prejudicially affect the
surrounding paddy fields. In light of the above findings, I hold
that the impugned order was passed in contravention of the
statutory mandate and the law laid down by this Court. Thus,
the impugned order is vitiated due to errors of law and non-
application of mind, and is liable to be quashed. Consequently,
the authorised officer is to be directed to reconsider the Form
5 application as per the procedure prescribed under the law.
In the circumstances mentioned above, I allow the writ
WP(C) NO. 4647 OF 2025
2025:KER:56185
petition in the following manner:
(i) Ext.P4 order is quashed.
(ii) The 3rd respondent/authorised officer is directed to
reconsider the Form 5 application, in accordance
with the law, by either conducting a personal
inspection of the property or calling for the satellite
pictures as provided under Rule 4(4f) of the Rules, at
the cost of the petitioner.
(iii) If satellite pictures are called for, the application
shall be disposed of within three months from the
date of receipt of such pictures. On the other hand, if
the authorised officer opts to inspect the property
personally, the application shall be disposed of within
two months from the date of production of a copy of
this judgment by the petitioner.
The writ petition is thus ordered accordingly.
sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
rkc/29.07.25
WP(C) NO. 4647 OF 2025
2025:KER:56185
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4647/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC LAND TAX RECEIPT
ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 02.11.2024
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE DATA
BANK OF KIZHAKKAMBALAM VILLAGE ISSUED BY THE
6TH RESPONDENT DATED 18.09.2019
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 5 APPLICATION DATED
26.03.2022 IN RESPECT OF SURVEY NOS. 99/1
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.11.2023
BEARING FILE NO. 11800/2023 ISSUED BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
