Kerala High Court
Al Madeena Institute Of Medical ... vs The District Collector on 13 June, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
WP(C) NO. 5798 OF 2025 1
2025:KER:42160
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
FRIDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JUNE 2025 / 23RD JYAISHTA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 5798 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
AL MADEENA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES (P) LTD.,
CHANGUVETTI, KOTTAKKAD, KOTTAKKAD.P.O, MALAPPURAM
REP.BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR MR. DR. AHAMED KABEER,
AGED 51, S/O BAVA HAJI PUTHUKADU, KOTTAKKAD, MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 676503
BY ADV SHRI.N.KRISHNA RAJA MAULI
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
MALAPPURAM, COLLECTORATE CIVIL STATION, UP HILL,
MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676505
2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER/SUB COLLECTOR,
TIRUR, MINI CIVIL STATION, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 676101
3 THE TAHSILDAR (LAND RECORDS),
TIRUR TALUK, TALUK OFFICE, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676101
4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
KOTTAKKAL VILLAGE OFFICE,AVS ROAD, MALAPPURAM - 676503
5 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
KRISHI BHAVAN, KOTTAKKAL VILLAGE, MALAPPURAM- 676503
SR.GP.SMT.K.K.PREETHA
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
13.06.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 5798 OF 2025 2
2025:KER:42160
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 13th day of June, 2025
The writ petition is filed to quash Ext.P6 order and
direct the 2nd respondent to re-consider Ext.P3 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 34.88
Ares of land comprised in Survey Nos.6/6-2, 6/7-1 of Kottkkal
Village, Malappuram District, covered by Ext.P1 possession
certificate. The petitioner's property is a converted land as
per Ext.P2 order passed under Clause 6(2) of the Kerala
Land Utilisation Order, 1967 ('KLUO', in short). However,
the respondents have erroneously classified the same as
'Nilam' and included it in the data bank. In order to exclude
the property from the data bank, the petitioner had
submitted Ext.P3 application before the 2nd respondent. The
petitioner had also submitted Ext.P4 application (Form A),
2025:KER:42160
before the 3rd respondent for re-assessment of tax and
correction in the basic tax register. By Ext.P5 judgment, this
Court directed the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P3
application, after adverting to the directions of the Division
Bench of this Court in Ext.P9 judgment. But, the 2 nd
respondent without adverting to the directions in Ex.P9
judgment, has perfunctorily rejected Ext.P3 application.
Ext.P6 order is passed in flagrant violation of the directions
in Ext.P5 judgment. Therefore, Ext.P6 order may be set
aside.
3. The 2nd respondent has filed a statement, inter
alia, stating that, the Agricultural Officer had inspected the
property and found that it was still remaining as a paddy
land and it was illegally converted by the applicant.
Therefore, it has been recommended to retain the land in the
data bank. Hence, the writ petition may be dismissed.
4. Heard; the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned Government Pleader.
2025:KER:42160
5. The petitioner's specific case is that, the petitioner's
property is a converted land, as per Ext.P2 KLU order. By
Ext.P5 judgment, this Court had directed the 2 nd respondent
to dispose of Ext.P3 application, after adverting to the law laid
down by this Court in Ext.P9 judgment.
6. A reading of Ext.P6 order substantiates that the 2 nd
respondent has not adverted to the directions in Ext.P5
judgment. Thus, I am satisfied that Ext.P6 order is liable to be
set aside for contemptuously disregarding the directions of
this Court.
Accordingly, I allow the writ petition in the following
manner:
(i). Ext.P6 order is quashed.
(ii). The 2nd respondent/authorised officer is
directed to reconsider Ext.P3 application, in
accordance with law and after adverting to Ext.P9
judgment. 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
2025:KER:42160
Rule 4(4f) at the expense of the petitioner.
(iii) If the authorised officer calls for the
satellite images, he shall consider Ext.P3 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 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
AJ
2025:KER:42160
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5798/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED
FROM VILLAGE OFFICER, KOTTAKKAL DATED 18.06.2023
Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY 2ND
RESPONDENT DATED 02.09.1997 WITH NO.
D.DIS/8369/97/F
Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FORM-5 APPLICATION DATED
28.06.2023 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FORM A APPLICATION ALONG WITH
RECEIPT DATED 07/07/2023
Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT DATED 20.06.2023 IN
W.P.(C) NO. 23302 OF 2023
Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 5 APPLICATION REJECTION
ORDER PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 3.9.2024
Exhibit P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WA NO.1670/2022
DATED 20.12.2022
Exhibit P8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE APEX
COURT IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.14731/2024 DATED
19.12.2024
RESPONDENT ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE R2(a) A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE AGRICULTURE
OFFICE DATED 07.10.2023
ANNEXURE R2(b) A TRUE COPY OF THE GEO TAGGED PHOTOS
