Kerala High Court
Sanjeed vs Sub Collector on 2 June, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:38416
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
MONDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF JUNE 2025 / 12TH JYAISHTA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 8392 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
SANJEED,
AGED 29 YEARS
S/O. UNNEENKUTTY, PALAPRA HOUSE,
PATHIKKARA, PERINTHALMANNA,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679322
BY ADV SRI.U.K.DEVIDAS
RESPONDENTS:
1 SUB COLLECTOR,
PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679322
2 AGRICULTURE OFFICER,
KRISHI BHAVAN, PATHAIKKARA,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676503
3 VILLAGE OFFICER,
VILLAGE OFFICE, PATHAIKKARA,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676503
4 DIRECTOR,
KERALA STATE REMOTE SENSING AND ENVIRONMENT CENTRE,
VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695033
OTHER PRESENT:
SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER- SMT PREETHA K K
STANDING COUNSEL- SRI VISHNU S
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
02.06.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 8392 of 2025 2
2025:KER:38416
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 2nd day of June, 2025
The writ petition is filed to quash Ext.P3 order
and direct the first respondent to re-consider Ext. P2
application (Form 5) submitted under Rule 4(d) of the
Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules,
2008 ('Rules' in short).
2. The petitioner is the owner in possession of
1.94 and 2.92 Ares of properties comprised in Survey
Nos. 34/6-11 and 34/6-33 respectively, of Pathaikkara
Village, Perinthalmanna Taluk, Malappuram District,
covered by Ext. P1 assignment deed and Ext. P1(a)
land tax receipt. The petitioner's property is a
residential plot and is not suitable for paddy
cultivation. However, the respondents have
erroneously classified the property as 'Nilam' and
included it in the data bank. In order to exclude the
property from the data bank, the petitioner had
submitted Ext. P2 application before the first
2025:KER:38416
respondent. However, the second respondent, by solely
relying on the report of the second respondent, has
perfunctorily rejected Ext. P2 application by the
impugned Ext. P3 order. Ext. P3 order is illegal and
arbitrary. Hence, the writ petition.
3. The first respondent has filed a statement
along with a photograph, inter alia, contending that the
Agricultural Officer has stated that the petitioner's
property is suitable for paddy cultivation. There was no
change in the land prior to 2008. Therefore, it cannot be
excluded from the data bank.
4. Heard; the learned counsel for the petitioner
and the learned Government Pleader.
5. The petitioner's specific case is that, his
property is a garden land. It is not suitable for paddy
cultivation. However, the property has been erroneously
classified as 'Nilam' and included it in the data bank.
The first respondent has rejected Ext. P2 application
solely based on the report of the second respondent
2025:KER:38416
without directly inspecting the property or calling for
satellite images.
6. In a plethora of judicial precedents, this Court
has held that, it is 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 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)).
7. Ext.P3 order substantiates that the first
respondent has not rendered any independent finding
regarding the nature and character of the petitioner's
property as on the crucial date, i.e., 12.08.2008, the date
2025:KER:38416
of the commencement of the Act, or whether the removal
of the petitioner's property from the data bank would
adversely affect the paddy cultivation. He has also not
directly inspected the property or called for satellite
images as envisaged under Rule 4(4f) of the Rules.
Instead, he has solely relied on the report of the second
respondent and rejected the application. Therefore, I
hold that there has been total non-application of the
mind in passing Ext.P3 order. Hence, I am satisfied that
Ext.P3 order is liable to be quashed and the first
respondent/authorised officer be directed to reconsider
the matter afresh, in accordance with law, after
adverting to the principles of law laid down in the
aforesaid decisions and the materials available on
record.
In the result, the writ petition is allowed in the
following manner:
(i). Ext.P3 order is quashed.
(ii). The first respondent/authorised officer is
2025:KER:38416
directed to reconsider Ext. P2 application, 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 Ext. P2
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. However, if he directly inspects the
property, he shall dispose of Ext. P2 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
mtk/02.06.25
2025:KER:38416
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8392/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSIGNMENT DEED NO.
311/2024 DATED 19.01.2024
Exhibit P1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT DATED
14.05.2024 ISSUED FROM THE VILLAGE
OFFICE, PATHAIKKARA
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 5 APPLICATION DATED
10.10.2024 UNDER THE KERALA CONSERVATION
OF PADDY LAND AND WET LAND ACT, 2008
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24.10.2024
PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
05.12.2023 IN W.P.(C) NO.4388/2023PASSED
BY THISHON'BLE COURT
RESPONDENT ANNEXURES
Annexure R1(a) The true copy of the relevant pages of
the Data Bank.
Annexure R1(b) A true copy of the photographs submitted
by the Agricultural Officer
