Kerala High Court
Raveendran Nair P.A vs The District Collector on 19 June, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:44867
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
THURSDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE 2025 / 29TH JYAISHTA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 39398 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
RAVEENDRAN NAIR P.A.,
AGED 69 YEARS
S/O. ACHUTHAN NAIR, RESIDING AT SAROJ VEEDU,
COLLEGE ROAD, MUVATTUPUZHA P.O, MARODY (PART),
MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686661
BY ADV SMT. ARYA ASHOKAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
COLLECTORATE ERNAKULAM, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682030
2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
MUVATTUPUZHA REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, GROUND FLOOR,
PATTIMATTOM-MUVATTUPUZHA ROAD, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAMM
DISTRICT, PIN - 686673
3 THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LR),
COLLECTORATE ERNAKULAM, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682030
4 THE THAHSILDAR (LR),
KUNNATHUNAD TALUK OFFICE, KUNNATHUNAD, POOPPANI ROAD,
PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683543
5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
KIZHAKKAMBALAM VILLAGE OFFICE, KIZHAKKAMBALAM,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683562
WP(C) NO. 39398 OF 2024 2
2025:KER:44867
6 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
KIZHAKKAMBALAM KRISHI BHAVAN, KIZHAKKAMBALAM ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 683562
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
19.06.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 39398 OF 2024 3
2025:KER:44867
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 19th day of June, 2025
The writ petition is filed to quash Ext.P5 order and
direct the 2nd respondent to re-consider Ext.P3 application
submitted in Form 5 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 4
Ares 55 Sq. Meters of land comprised in Survey No.288/6-
2 in Kizhakkambalam Village, Kunnathunadu Taluk,
Ernakulam 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. To
exclude the property from the data bank, the petitioner
had submitted Ext.P3 application before the 2nd
respondent. In fact, as per Ext.P4 report, the Local Level
Monitoring Committee (in short ' LLMC') has already
recommended the petitioner's property to be excluded
2025:KER:44867
from the data bank. Nevertheless, the 2 nd respondent, by
the impugned Ext.P5 order, has perfunctorily rejected
Ext.P3 application, without any application of mind.
Ext.P5 order is illegal and arbitrary. Hence, the writ
petition
3. Heard; the learned counsel for the petitioner
and the learned Government Pleader.
4. The petitioner's specific case is that, his
property is a converted land and is not suitable for paddy
cultivation. By Ext.P4 report, the LLMC has already
recommended the petitioner's property to be excluded
from the data bank. Yet, the 2 nd respondent has rejected
Ext.P3 application by the impugned order.
5. 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
2025:KER:44867
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)).
6. Ext.P5 order substantiates that the 2 nd
respondent has not directly inspected the property or
called for the satellite images as envisaged under the
Rules. The 2nd respondent has also not rendered any
independent finding regarding the nature and character of
the petitioner's property as on 12.08.2008, or whether the
removal of the petitioner's property from the data bank
would adversely affect the paddy cultivation in the locality.
Thus, I am satisfied that there is a total non application of
mind in passing Ext.P5 order, which is solely based on the
report of the Agricultural Officer. Therefore, I am
convinced and satisfied that Ext.P5 order is liable to be
quashed and the 2nd respondent/authorised officer be
2025:KER:44867
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.P5 order is quashed.
(ii). The 2nd respondent/authorised officer is
directed to reconsider Ext.P3 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.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
2025:KER:44867
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:44867
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 39398/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT BEARING NO.
KL07050312975/2023 DATED 10-11-2023
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE
DRAFT DATA BANK SIGNED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 5 APPLICATION SUBMITTED
BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT
DATED 13-05-2022
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES SHOWING THE
SUGGESTION OF LLMC MEETING HELD ON 30-12-2023
SIGNED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18-03-2024
BEARING FILE NO.2664/2024 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY
