Kerala High Court
Arun Luke, Represented By Power ... vs Village Officer on 18 June, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
WP(C) NO.12230 OF 2024
2025:KER:43541
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE 2025 / 28TH JYAISHTA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 12230 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
ARUN LUKE, REPRESENTED BY POWER ATTORNEY HOLDER, V.L
PHILIP, AGED 62 YEARS, S/O. LUKOSE (LATE), VETTIKKAL
HOUSE, VELIYANNOOR P.O, UZHAVOOR, KOTTAYAM-686 634.
S/O LATE LUKE, VETTIKKAL HOUSE, VELIYANNOOR P.O,
UZHAVOOR, KOTTAYAM
BY ADVS.
KUM.CHITHRA CHANDRASEKHARAN
SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (SR.)
RESPONDENTS:
1 VILLAGE OFFICER,
VILLAGE OFFICE UZHAVOOR, UZHAVOOR P.O, KOTTAYAM,
PIN - 686634
2 THE AGRICULTURE OFFICER (CONVENER),
LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE, VELLIYANNOOR
PANCHAYAT VELIYANNOOR P.O, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686634
3 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
PALA, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686575
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
18.06.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO.12230 OF 2024
2025:KER:43541
2
C.S.DIAS, J.
---------------------------------------
WP(C) No.12230 of 2024
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 18th day of June, 2025
JUDGMENT
The writ petition is filed to quash Ext.P3 order and
direct the 3rd respondent to re-consider Form 5 application
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
20.23 Ares of land comprised in Survey Nos.427/9-3 and
427/8-3 in Block No.2 of Uzhavoor Village, Meenachil
Taluk, Kottayam District covered under Ext.P1 land tax
receipt. The petitioner's property is a 'converted land'.
However, the respondents have erroneously classified the
same as 'paddy land' and included it in the data bank. In
order to exclude the property from the data bank, the
petitioner had submitted a Form 5 application before the
WP(C) NO.12230 OF 2024
2025:KER:43541
3rd respondent. But, by the impugned Ext.P3 order, the 3 rd
respondent has perfunctorily rejected Form 5 application.
In fact, by Ext.P4 order, the 3 rd respondent has allowed the
Form 5 application submitted by the adjacent property
owner. The petitioner is entitled to the benefit of Ext.P4
order. Hence, Ext.P3 may by quashed.
3. The 3rd respondent has filed a statement,
asserting that the Agricultural Officer has reported that
the petitioner's property is low-lying and consists of
coconut trees. There is a water stream passing through the
petitioner's property. Therefore, the LLMC has
recommended not to exclude the petitioner's property
from the data bank. Hence, there is no illegality in Ext.P3
order.
4. Heard; the learned Senior Counsel for the
petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.
5. The petitioner's specific case is that, his property
is a 'converted land', and is not suitable for paddy
WP(C) NO.12230 OF 2024
2025:KER:43541
cultivation. Even though he submitted Form 5 application
before 3rd respondent, the 3rd respondent without any
application of mind has rejected the same.
6. In a plethora of judicial precedents, this Court
has 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 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 3 rd respondent
has not directly inspected the property or called for the
satellite images as envisaged under Rule 4(4f) of the Rules.
WP(C) NO.12230 OF 2024
2025:KER:43541
He has also not rendered any independent finding
regarding the nature, character or lie of the petitioner's
property as on 12.08.2008, or whether the exclusion of
the petitioner's property from the data bank would
adversely affect the paddy cultivation in the locality.
Moreover, it is discernible from Ext.P4 that an adjacent
owner's property has been excluded from the data bank.
Thus, I am convinced and satisfied that Ext.P3 order has
been passed without any application of mind, and the same
is liable to be quashed and the 3 rd 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 3rd respondent/authorised officer is
WP(C) NO.12230 OF 2024
2025:KER:43541
directed to reconsider Form 5 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 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. 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
SCB.18.06.25.
WP(C) NO.12230 OF 2024
2025:KER:43541
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12230/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT NO.
KL05042300623/2024 DATED 29/02/2024 ISSUED
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SURVEY SKETCH OF THE
PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER, HIS MOTHER AND
HIS SIBLINGS PREPARED BY AN AUTHORIZED
SURVEYOR DATED NIL
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED NIL IN FILE
NO. 1506/2023 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT DATED 17/08/2023 IN FILE
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED
BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE SATELLITE REPORT NO .
A172/2025/KSREC/000972/2025 DATED
30/04/2025
