Kerala High Court
Sujith V vs The District Collector Palakkad on 20 May, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:34565
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MAY 2025 / 30TH VAISAKHA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 17630 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
SUJITH V
AGED 31 YEARS
S/O.VELAYUDHAN, THOTTINGAL VEEDU, PERINKULAM,
KATTUSSERY, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678542
BY ADV V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL)
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR PALAKKAD
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTORCOLLECTORATE, CIVIL
STATION, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678001
2 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE RCOLLECTOREVENUE DIVISIONAL
OFFICERCOLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION,PALAKKAD- 678001
3 THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (L.A),
R.D.O OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (L.A), CIVIL
STATION, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678001
4 THE PRINCIPAL AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, CIVIL
STATION, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678001
5 THE THAHSILDAR (L.R)
ALATHUR TALUK OFFICE,ALATHUR.P.O, PALAKKAD- 678542
6 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
ALATHUR VILLAGE, ALATHUR.P.O, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD,
PIN - 678542
WP(C) No.17630 of 2025 2
2025:KER:34565
7 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
KRISHIBHAVAN, ALATHUR.P.O, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD,
PIN - 678542
8 LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE
ALATHUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, ALATHUR.P.O, ALATHUR TALUK,
PALAKKADREP.BY ITS CONVENER., PIN - 678542
9 THE DIRECTOR
KERALA STATE REMOTE SENSING & ENVIRONMENT CENTRE,
'C' BLOCK, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANATHAPURAM,
PIN - 695033
SR PP SMT K K PREETHA
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
20.05.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) No.17630 of 2025 3
2025:KER:34565
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 20th day of May, 2025
The writ petition is filed to quash Ext.P6 order
and allow Ext.P5 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
0.0507 Hectare of land comprised in Re.Sy. No.193/26
in Block No.27 in Alathur Village of Alathur Taluk in
Palakkad District, covered by Ext.P1 possession
certificate. The petitioner's property is dry land and is
not suitable for paddy cultivation. However, the
respondents have erroneously classified the petitioner's
property as 'Nilam' in the data bank prepared under the
Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act,
2008 and the Rules framed thereunder. Accordingly, the
petitioner has submitted Ext.P5 application before the
2nd respondent to remove his property from the data
bank. Solely by relying on the report of the 7 th respondent,
2025:KER:34565
the 2nd respondent has rejected the
application on the ground that the petitioner's property
is a fallow land. Ext.P6 is illegal and arbitrary. Hence,
the writ petition.
3. Heard; the learned counsel for the petitioner
and the learned Government Pleader.
4. The specific case of the petitioner is that, his
property is dry land and is not suitable for paddy
cultivation. In fact, the respondents have erroneously
classified the petitioner's property as 'Nilam' in the data
bank.
5. It is trite law that, it is nature, lie, character
and fitness of the land, as available on 12.08.2008
i.e., the date of coming into force of the Act, that is to be
ascertained by the Revenue before taking a decision to
exclude a property from the data bank (read the
decisions of this Court in 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]).
2025:KER:34565
6. A reading of Ext.P6 order would substantiate
that the 2nd respondent has rejected Ext.P5 application
without any independent finding regarding the nature,
lie, or character of the petitioner's property, as on the
crucial date i.e., 12.08.2008, or whether the removal of
the petitioner's property from the data bank would
adversely affect paddy cultivation. It is solely on the
basis of the report of the 7th respondent and without
calling for a report from the Kerala State Remote
Sensing and Environment Centre (KSREC), that the 2 nd
respondent has arrived at the findings in Ext.P6 order,
which is a non-speaking and cryptic order. The decision
making process is vitiated and erroneous. Hence, I am
satisfied that Ext.P6 order is liable to be quashed and the
authorised officer be directed to reconsider the matter
afresh and in accordance with law, after adverting to all
the materials on record.
In the result, the writ petition is allowed in the
following manner:
(i). Ext.P6 order is quashed.
2025:KER:34565
(ii). The petitioner would be at liberty to file
an application before the 7th respondent/competent
authority, with a copy of this judgment, after
depositing the requisite fee, to call for a report from
the KSREC, to ascertain the nature, lie and
character of the property;
(iii). The 7th respondent shall immediately on
receipt of the application, call for a report from the
KSREC, and on receipt of the report, within four
weeks forward the same with his report to the 2 nd
respondent.
(iv). The 2nd respondent/authorised officer
shall reconsider Ext.P5 application, in accordance
with law and as expeditiously as possible, at any
rate, within three months from the date of receipt
of a report from the 7th respondent.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
AJ
2025:KER:34565
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17630/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED
08.05.2024 ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH OF THE PETITIONER'S
PROPERTY ISSUED BY 6TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE DATA
BANK OF THE PETITIONER'S PROPERTY PUBLISHED
BY ALATHUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT
Exhibit P4 PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PETITIONER'S PROPERTY
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER'S APPLICATION
DATED 13.05.2024
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN FILE NO.602/2025
DATED 29.03.2025 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
