Kerala High Court
Kumman Jayadevan vs The Revenue Divisional Officer on 30 July, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:56543
WP(C) NO. 1302 OF 2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 8TH SRAVANA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 1302 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
KUMMAN JAYADEVAN,
AGED 68 YEARS
S/O ANANDAN, ANANDHAM, KOTTARATHUMPARA, AZHIKODE
SOUTH, KANNUR, PIN - 670009
BY ADVS.
SRI.RAJESH V.NAIR
SHRI.R.PARTHASARATHY
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, THALIPARAMBA, KANNUR,
PIN - 670141
2 THE AGRICULTURE OFFICER,
KRISHIBHAVAN, VANKULATHVAYAL, AZHOKODE, KANNUR, PIN
- 670009
3 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF
REVENUE,SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN -
695001
SMT.DEEPA V., GP
2025:KER:56543
WP(C) NO. 1302 OF 2025
2
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL
HEARING ON 30.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:56543
WP(C) NO. 1302 OF 2025
3
C.S.DIAS, J.
---------------------------------------
WP(C) No.1302 of 2025
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 30th day of July, 2025
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is the owner in possession of 27.60
Ares of land comprised in Re-survey Nos. 79/114, 79/115
and 79/116 in Block No.167 in Azhikode North Village,
covered under Exts.P1 to P1(b) documents. The property
is a converted 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.P-2 application in Form 5,
under Rule 4(4d) of the Rules. However, by Ext.P4 order,
2025:KER:56543
WP(C) NO. 1302 OF 2025
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 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
2025:KER:56543
WP(C) NO. 1302 OF 2025
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 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
2025:KER:56543
WP(C) NO. 1302 OF 2025
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, who in turn has relied on the recommendation of
the Local Level Monitoring Committee, 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.
2025:KER:56543
WP(C) NO. 1302 OF 2025
In the circumstances mentioned above, I allow the
writ petition in the following manner:
(i) Ext.P4 order is quashed.
(ii) The 1st respondent/authorised officer is directed to
reconsider the Form 5, 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
dkr
2025:KER:56543
WP(C) NO. 1302 OF 2025
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1302/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JENMAM DEED DOCUMENT
NO.875/1981 DATED 25.03.1981 OF SUB
REGISTRAR'S OFFICE, VALAPATTANAM
EXHIBIT P1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE JENMAM DEED DOCUMENT
NO.876/1981 DATED 25.03.1981 OF SUB
REGISTRAR'S OFFICE, VALAPATTANAM
EXHIBIT P1(B) TRUE COPY OF THE JENMAM DEED DOCUMENT
NO.1667/1979 DATED 23.08.1979 OF SUB
REGISTRAR'S OFFICE, VALAPATTANAM
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 5 APPLICATION DATED
26.10.2022 FILED BEFORE 1ST RESPONDENT
ALONG WITH ITS TYPED COPY.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT FILED DATED
09.02.2024 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.02.2024
PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P5 PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PROPERTIES (4 NUMBERS)
