Kerala High Court
Malanad Communications vs The District Collector on 9 July, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
WP(C) NO. 38803 OF 2023
1
2025:KER:50397
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 18TH ASHADHA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 38803 OF 2023
PETITIONER/S:
MALANAD COMMUNICATIONS,
AGED 59 YEARS
MUTTIL,WAYANAD REP.BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, BENNY
ALIAS,S/O.K.M ALIAS, KAKKATTUKUDIYIL HOUSE,MUTTIL P.O,
KALPETTA, WAYANAD, PIN - 673122
BY ADV SMT. ARYA ASHOKAN
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
COLLECTORATE WAYANAD,NORTH KALPETTA P.O, AYANAD
DISTRICT, PIN - 673122
2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
MANANTHAVADY REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
MANANTHAVADY,WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN - 670645
3 THE TAHSILDAR (LR),
VYTHIRI TALUK OFFICE, VYTHIRI, WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN -
673576
4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
MUTTIL NORTH VILLAGE OFFICE, MUTTIL NORTH,MUTTIL,
WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN - 673122
5 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
MUTTIL KRISHI BHAVAN, MUTTIL SOUTH, MUTTIL,WAYANAD
DISTRICT, PIN - 673122
6 THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE,
MUTTIL GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REP.BY ITS CONVENER,THE
AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, MUTTIL KRISHI BHAVAN,MUTTIL
SOUTH, MUTTIL,WAYANAD, PIN - 673122
WP(C) NO. 38803 OF 2023
2
2025:KER:50397
7 THE DIRECTOR
KERALA STATE REMOTE SENSING AND ENVIRONMENT CENTRE,1ST
FLOOR, VIKAS BHAVAN,NEAR LEGISLATIVE
ASSEMBLY,UNIVERSITY OF KERALA SENATE HOUSE
CAMPUS,PMG,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695033
SR.GP SMT. VIDYA KURIAKOSE
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 38803 OF 2023
3
2025:KER:50397
C.S.DIAS, J.
---------------------------------------
WP(C) No.38803 OF 2023
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 9th day of July, 2025
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is a Company which owns and possesses
21 Ares and 5 Sq.Mt. of land, comprised in Survey No.731/27
in Muttil North Village, Vaithiri Taluk, covered under Ext.P1
land tax receipt. 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 petitioner had submitted a Form 5 application
under Rule 4(4d) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land
and Wetland Rules, 2008 ('Rules' in short) before the 2 nd
respondent. But, by the impugned Ext.P4 order, the authorised
officer has perfunctorily rejected the Form 5 application,
without inspecting the property directly or calling for satellite
images as envisaged under Rule 4(4f) of the Rules. He has
also not rendered any independent finding regarding the
nature and character of the property as on 12.08.2008. Hence,
WP(C) NO. 38803 OF 2023
2025:KER:50397
Ext.P4 order is illegal and arbitrary, and is liable to be
quashed.
2. Ext.P4 order shows that the 2nd respondent has
rejected the said application principally for the reason that the
petitioner has not produced the requisite documents.
3. Heard; the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned Government Pleader.
4. The petitioner's specific case is that, their property is a
converted land. It is not suitable for paddy cultivation. But,
the property has been erroneously classified in the data bank
as paddy land. Even though the petitioner had submitted a
Form 5 application, to exclude the property from the data
bank, the same has been rejected by the authorised officer
without any application of mind.
5. In a host of judicial pronouncements, this Court has
emphatically held that, it is the nature, lie, 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
WP(C) NO. 38803 OF 2023
2025:KER:50397
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)).
6. Ext.P4 order substantiates that the authorised officer
has not directly inspected the property or called for the
satellite images as envisaged under Rule 4(4f) of the Rules. He
has also 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 in the locality.
Instead, by solely relying on the report of the Agricultural
Officer and stating that the petitioner has not produced the
requisite documents, the impugned order has been passed.
There is no mention in Ext.P4 order that the authorised officer
had issued notice to the petitioner directing them to produce
the requisite documents. 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
WP(C) NO. 38803 OF 2023
2025:KER:50397
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.P4 order is quashed.
(ii) The 2nd respondent/authorised officer is directed to
reconsider the Form 5 application submitted by the
petition, in accordance with law. It would be up to the
authorised officer to either directly inspect the
property or call for satellite images, as per the
procedure provided under Rule 4(4f), at the expense
of the petitioner.
(iii) If the authorised officer calls for the satellite images,
he shall consider the Form 5 application, in
accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible,
at any rate, within three months from the date of the
receipt of the satellite images. In case he directly
inspects the property, he shall dispose of the
WP(C) NO. 38803 OF 2023
2025:KER:50397
application within two months from the date of
production of a copy of this judgment.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly.
sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
rkc/09.07.25
WP(C) NO. 38803 OF 2023
2025:KER:50397
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 38803/2023
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit-P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT BEARING
NO.KL12031101215/2023 DATED 13.04.2023
Exhibit -P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF DRAFT
DATA BANK
Exhibit-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 25.01.2022
Exhibit-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. RDOMDY/12/2022-J
DATED 06.04.2022 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT
