Kerala High Court
Jayaprakash.K vs District Collector, Malappuram on 10 June, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
WP(C) NO. 31848 OF 2024 1
2025:KER:40628
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
TUESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE 2025 / 20TH JYAISHTA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 31848 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
JAYAPRAKASH.K,
AGED 60 YEARS
S/O RAMAKRISHNA PANICKER, RESIDING AT PAZHAYEDATH
VEEDU, PERINTHALMANNA AMSOM AND DESOM,
PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, PERINTHALMANNA P.O.,
MALAPPURAM, PIN - 679322
BY ADV SRI.NIRMAL V NAIR
RESPONDENTS:
1 DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM,
COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, UP HILL P.O.,
MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676505
2 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER/SUB COLLECTOR,
PERINTHALMANNA,
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, PERINTHALMANNA,
PERINTHALMANNA P.O., MALAPPURAM, PIN - 679322
3 VILLAGE OFFICER, PATHAIKARA,
PATHAIKARA VILLAGE OFFICE, PATHAIKARA P.O.,
MALAPPURAM, PIN - 679322
4 AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN, PERINTHALMANNA,
PERINTHALMANNA CIVIL STATION, PERINTHALMANNA P.O.,
MALAPPURAM, PIN - 679322
5 DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE REMOTE SENSING AND
ENVIRONMENT CENTRE,
1ST FLOOR, VIKAS BHAVAN, NEAR LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY,
UNIVERSITY OF KERALA SENATE HOUSE CAMPUS, PMG, VIKAS
BHAVAN P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695033
BY SR.GP.SMT.K.K.PREETHA,
SRI.VISHNU S CHEMPAZHATHIYIL, SC, KSREC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING ON
10.06.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 31848 OF 2024 2
2025:KER:40628
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 10th day of June, 2025
The writ petition is filed to quash Ext.P3 order
and direct the 2nd respondent to re-consider Ext.P2
application (Form 5) submitted by the petitioner 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
8.08 Ares of land comprised in Re-Survey Nos. 62/1-18
and 62/1-19 of the Pathaikkara Village, Perinthalmanna
Taluk, Malappuram District covered by Ext.P1 land tax
receipt. The petitioner's property is a converted land.
However, the respondents have erroneously classified
the property as 'paddy land' 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 2nd respondent. But, by the impugned Ext.P3
order, the 2nd respondent has perfunctorily rejected
Ext.P2 application, without any application of mind. The
2025:KER:40628
2nd respondent has not directly inspected the property or
called for satellite images as envisaged under Rule 4(4f)
of the Rules. Therefore, Ext.P3 order may be quashed.
3. The 2nd respondent has filed a statement,
inter alia, stating that, the petitioner's property is not a
garden land. It is a paddy land and lies fallow. The
Pathaykkara Patasekharam is adjacent to the
petitioner's property. The existence of building in the
adjacent fields were all subsequent to 2008. The
petitioner's property is suitable for paddy cultivation. If
it is excluded from the data bank, it would adversely
affect the nearby paddy cultivation and natural flow of
water. Hence, the writ petition may be dismissed.
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 converted land. It is not suitable for paddy cultivation.
Even though he had submitted Ext.P2 application to
exclude the property from the data bank, the same has
been perfunctorily rejected by the 2 nd respondent without
2025:KER:40628
any application of mind.
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 2 nd respondent
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 finding regarding the
nature and character of the petitioner's property as on
12.08.2008, or whether the exclusion of the petitioner's
2025:KER:40628
property from the data bank would adversely affect the
paddy cultivation. Thus, I am satisfied that there has been
total non-application of mind in passing Ext.P3 order by
the 2nd respondent, and the same is liable to be quashed
and the 2nd 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 disposed of in the
following manner:
(i) Ext.P3 order is quashed.
(ii) The 2nd respondent/authorised officer is
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
2025:KER:40628
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 the
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
NAB
2025:KER:40628
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 31848/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED
21-4-2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION IN FORM-5
DATED 1-2-2022 SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT
BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. 948/2022
DATED 28-12-2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 18-3-
2024 IN W.P.(C). NO. 25238/2022 ON THE
FILES OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT
