Kerala High Court
Leena Isahak vs Revenue Divisional Officer on 31 July, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:56856
WP(C) NO. 28821 OF 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
THURSDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF JULY 2025 / 9TH SRAVANA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 28821 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
LEENA ISAHAK,
AGED 48 YEARS
W/O DR. MUHAMMED ANAS,MOOKKADA HOUSE, PERUMBAVOOR,
NOW RESIDING AT 8D,DUKES,SKYLINE IMPERIAL GARDEN,
KALOOR,ERNAKULAM,KOCHI, PIN - 682018
BY ADVS.
SMT.AKHEELA FARZANA
SMT.SAJITHA SIDHIK
SMT.ANJALA FARHATH V.S.
SRI.V.K.SIDHIQUE
RESPONDENTS:
1 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
MUVATTUPUZHA,MINI CIVIL STATION, MUVATTUPUZHA, PIN
- 686669
2 AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
KRISHIBHAVAN ,PERUMBAVOOR, PIN - 683542
3 VILLAGE OFFICER,
PERUMBAVOOR VILLAGE,PERUMBAVOOR, PIN - 683542
4 LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE,
REPRESENTED BY CONVENOR/ AGRICULTURE
OFFICER,KRISHIBHAVAN , PERUMBAVOOR, PIN - 683542
2025:KER:56856
WP(C) NO. 28821 OF 2024
2
SMT.VIDYA KURIAKOSE, SR.GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 31.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:56856
WP(C) NO. 28821 OF 2024
3
C.S.DIAS, J.
---------------------------------------
WP(C) No.28821of 2024
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 31st day of July, 2025
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is the owner in possession of 6.66
Ares of land comprised in Re-survey No.29/2-2 of
Perumbavoor Village, Ernakulam District, covered under
Ext.P2 land tax receipt. 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.P5
application in Form 5, under Rule 4(4d) of the Rules.
However, by Ext.P6 order, the authorised officer has
2025:KER:56856
WP(C) NO. 28821 OF 2024
summarily rejected the application without directing
inspecting the property. Even though, the 2 nd respondent/
Agricultural Officer had called for Ext.P7 satellite
pictures from the Kerala State Remote Sensing and
Environment Centre (KSREC, in short), the same was not
adverted to by the 1st respondent in Ext.P6 order. Ext.P6
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
2025:KER:56856
WP(C) NO. 28821 OF 2024
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 are the decisive criteria to determine
whether the property is to be excluded from the data
bank.
5. A reading of Ext.P6 order reveals that the
authorised officer has failed to comply with the statutory
2025:KER:56856
WP(C) NO. 28821 OF 2024
requirements. There is no indication in the order that the
authorised officer has personally inspected the property.
Even though the Agricultural Officer has called for
Ext.P7 report as mandated under Rule 4(4f) of the Rules,
the authorised officer has not considered the said report.
Instead, the authorised officer has merely acted on the
report of the Agricultural Officer, who in turn as relied
on the recommendation of the Local Level Monitoring
Committee. The authorised officer has not rendered 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
2025:KER:56856
WP(C) NO. 28821 OF 2024
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 petition in the following manner:
(i) Ext.P6 order is quashed.
(ii) The 1st respondent/authorised officer is directed to
reconsider the Form 5, in accordance with the law,
at any rate within 90 days from the date of
production of the copy of this judgment;
(iii) The authorised officer shall either directly inspect
the property or consider Ext.P7 KSREC report.
The writ petition is thus ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
dkr
2025:KER:56856
WP(C) NO. 28821 OF 2024
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 28821/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE DOCUMENT NUMBER
4165 /2008 OF PERUMBAVOOR SRO DATED
29/05/2008
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED
02/09/2022
EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF
THE DATA BANK
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIRST
RESPONDENT DATED 04/04/1999
EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE FORM 5
APPLICATION DATED 28/09/2022 SUBMITTED BY
THE PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED
14/06/2024 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE KSREC REPORT
DATED 13/05/2024
EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF
RESOLUTION OF THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING
COMMITTEE DATED 25/09/2023 ALONG WITH THE
COVERING LETTER FROM AGRICULTURE FIELD
OFFICER.
