Kerala High Court
Khalam C.A vs District Collector Ernakulam on 27 May, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
WP(C) NO. 17315 OF 2025
1
2025:KER:36541
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MAY 2025 / 6TH JYAISHTA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 17315 OF 2025
PETITIONER/S:
KHALAM C.A.
AGED 59 YEARS
S/O ABDUL KAREEM, HOUSE NO. 13/108 A, A.K. ROAD,
PANAYAPPILLY, MATTANCHERRY, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682002
BY ADVS.
B.K.GOPALAKRISHNAN
KRISHNAKUMAR S.
NIKITHA P.
RESPONDENT/S:
1 DISTRICT COLLECTOR ERNAKULAM
OFFICE OF THE COLLECTOR COLLECTORATE, ERNAKULAM, PIN
- 682030
2 DEPUTY COLLECTOR [D.M.]
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR COLLECTORATE,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682030
3 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, FORT KOCHI, ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 682001
4 THE TAHSILDAR
NORTH PARAVUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN -
683513
5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
VILLAGE OFFICE, KARUMALOOR, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683511
6 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
THE OFFICE OF THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KARUMALOOR,
WP(C) NO. 17315 OF 2025
2
2025:KER:36541
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683511
SR.GP SMT.VIDYA KURIAKOSE
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 27.05.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 17315 OF 2025
3
2025:KER:36541
C.S.DIAS, J.
---------------------------------------
WP(C) No. 17315 of 2025
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 27th day of May, 2025
JUDGMENT
The writ petition is filed to quash Ext.P6 order and
direct the 2nd respondent to reconsider 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 58
Ares and 28 Sq.Meter of land comprised in Survey
No.245/6 of Karumaloor Village, Paravoor Taluk,
Ernakulam District covered by Ext.P1 title deed and Ext.P2
basic tax receipt. The petitioner's property is a dry land
and is not suitable for any agricultural operation.
However, the respondents have erroneously classified the
property as 'nilam' and included it in the data bank. In the
said background, the petitioner had submitted Ext.P5
application to remove the property from the data bank.
The 2nd respondent, solely based on the report of the
WP(C) NO. 17315 OF 2025
2025:KER:36541
Agricultural Officer/6 th
respondent and the
recommendations of the Local Level Monitoring
Committee (in short, 'LLMC'), has perfunctorily rejected
Ext.P5 application by Ext.P6 order. 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 petitioner's specific is case that, his property
is a converted land much prior to the coming into force of
the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act,
2008. The petitioner's property is not suitable for paddy
cultivation. There are coconut trees aged above 25 years
and there are buildings in the entire locality. There is also
no water body near the petitioner's property. However, the
2nd respondent has, based on the report of the Agricultural
Officer, who has stated that the property is lying as nilam
and water logged and the report of the LLMC, which has
recommended not to remove the property from the data
bank, passed Ext.P6 order.
5. In a plethora of judicial pronouncements, this
WP(C) NO. 17315 OF 2025
2025:KER:36541
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)).
6. In Rasheed C v. Revenue Divisional Officer/Sub
Collector (2025 KHC 1666), this Court has succinctly held
that, a Form 5 application cannot be considered on the
basis of the observations of the LLMC, since the said
procedure is not contemplated under the Rules. The Rules
only provide to call for a report from the Agricultural
Officer or getting a scientific report from the Kerala State
Remote Sensing and Environment Centre (KSREC).
7. A reading of Ext.P6 order substantiates that the
WP(C) NO. 17315 OF 2025
2025:KER:36541
2 nd
respondent has not directly inspected the petitioner's
property or called for the satellite images as envisaged
under rule 4(4f) of the Rules. Instead, the 2 nd respondent,
by solely relying on the recommendations made by the
Agricultural Officer and the LLMC, has rejected Ext.P5
application. I find that there has been total non-application
of mind in passing the impugned order. Hence, I am
satisfied that Ext.P6 order is liable to be quashed and the
2nd respondent/authorised officer be directed to reconsider
Ext.P5 application afresh, in accordance with law, after
adverting to the principles laid down in the aforecited
decisions and the materials available on record.
In the result, the writ petition is allowed in the
following manner:
(i). Ext.P6 order is quashed.
(ii). The 2nd respondent/authorised officer is directed
to reconsider Ext.P5 application, in accordance
with law. It would be upto to the authorised
officer to either directly inspect the property or
call for satellite images as per the procedure
WP(C) NO. 17315 OF 2025
2025:KER:36541
provided under rule 4(4f) of the Rules at the
expense of the petitioner.
(iii). If the authorised officer calls for the satellite
image, he shall consider Ext.P5 application, in
accordance with law and as expeditiously as
possible, at any rate, within three months from
the date of receipt of the satellite images. In case,
he decides to directly inspect 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
rkc/27.05.25
WP(C) NO. 17315 OF 2025
2025:KER:36541
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17315/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF SALE DEED NO.6637/2007
DATED 12/ 9/ 2007 OF SRO CHENGAMANAD ALONG
WITH SKETCH
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT NUMBER
KL 0703020 5688 /2022 DATED 12-5-2022
REMITTED BY THE PETITIONER IN RESPECT OF
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
Exhibit P3 THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE NATURE OF LAND
Exhibit P4 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF
THE DATA BANK SHOWING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
Exhibit P5 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE FORM 5 APPLICATION
DATED 12TH MAY, 2022 SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT DATED 11/8/2024 REJECTING FORM
5 APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
