Kerala High Court
Vaheedudeen K.A vs State Of Kerala on 1 July, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
WP(C) NO. 18605 OF 2025 1
2025:KER:47675
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JULY 2025 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 18605 OF 2025
PETITIONERS:
1 VAHEEDUDEEN K.A
AGED 55 YEARS
S/O ABDUL RAHIM K.M., KARUPPAM VEEDU,
THAIKKATTUKARA P.O., ALUVA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683106
2 MUHAMMAD SELMAN
AGED 54 YEARS
S/O ABDUL RAHIM K.M., KARUPPAM VEEDU,
THAIKKATTUKARA P.O., ALUVA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683106
BY ADVS.
SHRI.LAL K.JOSEPH
SRI.P.MURALEEDHARAN (THURAVOOR)
SMT.T.A.LUXY
SHRI.SURESH SUKUMAR
SRI.ANZIL SALIM
SHRI.SANJAY SELLEN
SMT.SONIA SHIBU
SHRI.MUHAMMED YAHIYA
SMT.AMJANA MUMTHAZ P.
SHRI.AKHIL RAJ R.
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF
AGRICULTURE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695001
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
ERNAKULAM, COLLECTORATE, KAKKANAD,
ERNAKULAM,, PIN - 682030
WP(C) NO. 18605 OF 2025 2
2025:KER:47675
3 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, FIRST FLOOR,
K B JACOB ROAD, FORT KOCHI, KOCHI, ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 682001
4 THE CHAIRMAN
LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE CONSTITUTED UNDER
THE PROVISIONS OF KERALA CONSERVATION OF PADDY LAND
& WET LAND ACT, CHOORNIKKARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
THAIKKATTUKARA P.O., ALUVA, ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 683106
5 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
CONVENER, LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE
CONSTITUTED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF KERALA
CONSERVATION OF PADDY LAND & WET LAND ACT,
KRISHI BHAVAN, CHOORNIKKARA, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 683106
6 VILLAGE OFFICER
CHOORNIKKARA VILLAGE OFFICE, THAIKKATTUKARA P.O.,
ALUVA, ERNAKULAM,, PIN - 683106
7 THE DIRECTOR
KERALA STATE REMOTE SENSING AND ENVIRONMENT CENTRE
(KSRSEC), VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,,
PIN - 695033
BY SMT.VIDYA KURIAKOSE, SR.GP
SRI. VISHNU S. CHEMPAZHANTHIYIL, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 01.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 18605 OF 2025 3
2025:KER:47675
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 01st day of July, 2025
The petitioners are the co-owners in possession of
18.77 Ares of land comprised in Survey Nos.138/5 and
138/5-2-2 in Block No.34 in Choornikkara Village, Aluva
Taluk, covered under Exts.P1(a) and P2(a) land tax
receipts. The property is a converted land. It is not
suitable for paddy cultivation. However, the respondents
have erroneously classified the property as 'paddy land'
and included it in the data bank. To exclude the property
from the data bank, the petitioners had submitted Ext.P3
application in Form 5 under Rule 4(4d) of the Kerala
Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008
('Rules' in short). But, by the impugned Ext.P8 order, the
authorised officer has perfunctorily rejected Ext.P3
application, by observing that as per Ext.P5 report of the
Kerala State Remote Sensing and Environment Centre
(KSREC) the petitioners' property is a fallow land. The
2025:KER:47675
Local Level Monitoring Committee (LLMC) has
recommended not to exclude the property from the data
bank. The 3rd respondent has not rendered any
independent finding regarding the nature and character
of the petitioners' property as on 12.08.2008. Hence,
Ext.P8 order is illegal and arbitrary, and is liable to be
quashed.
2. Heard; the learned counsel for the petitioners
and the learned Senior Government Pleader.
3. The petitioners' specific case is that, their
property is a converted land. It is not suitable for paddy
cultivation. But, the respondents have erroneously
classified the property as paddy land and included it in
the data bank. Even though the petitioners had submitted
a Form 5 application, to exclude the property from the
data bank, the same has been rejected by the 3 rd
respondent without any application of mind.
4. In a host of judicial pronouncements, this
Court has emphatically held that, it is the nature, lie,
2025:KER:47675
character and fitness of the land, and whether the land is
suitable for paddy cultivation as on 12.08.2008 i.e., the
date of coming into force of the Act, are the relevant
criteria to be ascertained by the Revenue Divisional
Officer to exclude a property from the data bank (read
the decisions of this Court 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 and others (2021 (1) KLT 433)).
5. Ext.P8 order substantiates that the authorised
officer has not directly inspected the property. Instead
he has called for Ext.P5 KSREC report. A reading of
Ext.P5 substantiates that the property was observed as a
fallow land in the data of 2008. The said pattern has
continued in the data of 2011, 2016 and 2021. The 3rd
respondent has also relied on the recommendations of the
LLMC.
2025:KER:47675
6. In Mather Nagar Residents Association and
Another v. District Collector, Ernakulam others
(2020 (2) KHC 94), a Division Bench of this Court has
held that, merely because a property is lying fallow and
water gets logged during rainy season or otherwise, due
to the low lying nature of the property, it cannot be
treated as wetland or paddy land in contemplation of Act,
2008. A similar view has been taken by this Court in
Aparna Sasi Menon v. Revenue Divisional Officer,
Irinjalakuda, (2023 (6) KHC 83), holding that the prime
consideration to retain a property in data bank is to
ascertain whether paddy cultivation is possible in the
land.
7. In Rasheed C v. Revenue Divisional
Officer/Sub Collector (2025 KHC 1666), this Court has
succinctly held that, a Form 5 application cannot be
considered on the basis of the observations of the LLMC,
since the said procedure is not contemplated under the
Rules. The Rules only provide to call for a report from
2025:KER:47675
the Agricultural Officer or to get a scientific report from
the KSREC.
8. Ext.P8 order also substantiates that, the 3rd
respondent has not rendered any independent finding
regarding the nature and character of the property as on
12.08.2008, or whether the removal of the property from
the data bank would adversely affect the paddy
cultivation. Thus, I am satisfied that the impugned order
has been passed without any application of mind, and the
same is liable to be quashed and the authorised officer be
directed to reconsider the matter afresh, in accordance
with law, after adverting to the principles of law laid
down by this Court in the aforesaid decisions and the
materials available on record.
Accordingly, I allow the writ petition in the
following manner:
(i). Ext.P8 order is quashed.
(ii). The 3rd respondent/authorised officer is
directed to reconsider Ext.P3 application, in
2025:KER:47675
accordance with law, and as expeditiously as
possible, at any rate, within three months from the
date of production of a copy of this judgment. It
would be upto the petitioners to submit a copy of
the writ petition along with the copy of the
judgment.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
NAB
2025:KER:47675
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18605/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED
NO.2974/2004 DATED 18/06/2004 OF SRO,
ALUVA
EXHIBIT P1(a) THE TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX PAYMENT
RECEIPT OF LAND IN RE.SY.NO.135/5 DATED
23/05/2024 ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED
NO.529/2014 DATED 31/01/2014 OF SRO,
ALUVA
EXHIBIT P2(a) THE TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX PAYMENT
RECEIPT OF LAND COMPRISED IN
RE.SY.NO.135/5-2-2 DATED 23/05/2024
ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FORM NO.5
APPLICATION FILED UNDER THE KERALA
CONSERVATION OF PADDY LAND AND WETLAND
RULES 2008 DATED 28/01/2021 BEFORE THE
3RD RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONERS.
EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE UNDATED LETTER
ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD
RESPONDENT ALONG WITH MINUTES OF THE LLMC
MEETING (CONDUCTED ON 18/06/2022 AND
25/10/2022) BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT IN THE
PRESENCE OF 5TH RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P5 THE TRUE COPY OF SURVEY PLOT GEO-
REFERENCED WITH SATELLITE DATA DATED
30/07/2022 ISSUED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT
TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE UNDATED SUMMARIZED
LLMC DECISION TAKEN BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT
AND FORWARDED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO
THE 3RD RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE UNDATED REPORT
SUBMITTED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT IN
PRESCRIBED STATUTORY FORMAT UNDER THE ACT
AND RULES OF 2008 IN RESPECT OF THE
PROPERTY COVERED BY EXT.P1 AND P2 TITLE
DEEDS
EXHIBIT P8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.K-
28/16664/2022 DATED 16/08/2023 PASSED BY
THE 3RD RESPONDENT REJECTING THE EXT.P3
APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONERS
2025:KER:47675
EXHIBIT P9 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS
REVEALING THE NATURE OF THE PROPERTY
COVERED BY EXT.P1 AND P2 AFTER THE WEEDS
ARE CUT (7 NOS.)
