Kerala High Court
Abijith C vs Revenue Divisional Officer on 3 November, 2025
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
WP(C) NO. 14837 OF 2024 1
2025:KER:83070
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
MONDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 / 12TH KARTHIKA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 14837 OF 2024
PETITIONER/S:
ABIJITH C ,
AGED 30 YEARS
S/O VISWANATHAN, KATTAYIL HOUSE, VELUTHOOR P O,
VELUTHOOR VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR DT.,
PIN - 680012
BY ADVS.
SRI.SHOBY K.FRANCIS
SMT.AGI SHOBY
RESPONDENT/S:
1 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE RDO, AYYANTHOLE PO, COLLECTORATE,
THRISSUR, PIN - 680003
2 TAHSILDAR [LAND RECORDS],
THRISSUR TALUK, MINI CIVIL STATION, CHEMBUKAVU PO,
THRISSUR., PIN - 680020
3 VILLAGE OFFICER,
VELUTHOOR VILLAGE, VELUTHOOR P O, THRISSUR DT., PIN
- 680012
4 LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE [LLMC]-(WITHIN THE
WP(C) NO. 14837 OF 2024 2
2025:KER:83070
LOCAL LIMITS OF ARIMBOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH),
REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER, AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
KRISHI BHAVAN, ARIMBOOR PO, THRISSUR DT., PIN -
680620
5 AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
KRISHI BHAVAN, ARIMBOOR PO, THRISSUR DT., PIN -
680620
OTHER PRESENT:
GP SMT PREETHA K K
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 03.11.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 14837 OF 2024 3
2025:KER:83070
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
--------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 14837 of 2024
--------------------------------------
Dated this the 3rd day of November, 2025
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed seeking the following
reliefs:
"(I) Issue a Writ of Certiorari and quash Exhibit P-3
Order passed by the 1st respondent and it's all further
proceedings.
(II) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the 1st
respondent to reconsider and pass a speaking Order on the
Exhibit P-2, Form 5 application submitted by the petitioner in
accordance with Sec. 27-A of the Kerala Conservation of
Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008 afresh within a time
limit.
(III) Issue a Writ of mandamus directing the respondents
to delete or exclude petitioners' property having a total
extent of 5.46 Ares ie 13.5 cents of land comprised in Survey
No. 639/pt 2 of Veluthoor village in Thrissur Taluk in
Thrissur District on the basis of Exhibit P-2 Form No. 5
2025:KER:83070
application submitted by the petitioner and allow the same,
within a time frame.
(IV) Dispense with the filing of translation of vernacular
documents. AND
(V) Issue such other relief this Hon'ble Court may deem
fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."
[SIC]
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P3 order
passed by the 1st respondent rejecting Form - 5 application
submitted by him under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy
Land and Wetland Rules, 2008 ('Rules', for brevity). The
main grievance of the petitioner is that the authorised officer
has not considered the contentions of the petitioner.
3. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and
the learned Government Pleader.
4. This Court perused the impugned order. I am
of the considered opinion that the authorised officer has
failed to comply the statutory requirements. The impugned
order is passed by the authorised officer solely based on the
report of the Agricultural Officer. There is no indication in
2025:KER:83070
the order that the authorised officer has directly inspected
the property or called for the satellite pictures as mandated
under Rule 4(4f) of the Rules. There is no independent
finding regarding the nature and character of the land as on
the relevant date by the authorised officer. Moreover, the
authorised officer has not considered whether the exclusion
of the property would prejudicially affect the surrounding
paddy fields.
5. 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 [2021 (1) KLT 433],
observed that the competent authority is obliged to assess
the nature, lie and character of the land and its suitability for
paddy cultivation as on 12.08.2008, which are the decisive
criteria to determine whether the property merits exclusion
from the data bank. The impugned order is not in accordance
2025:KER:83070
with the principle laid down by this Court in the above
judgments. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that
the impugned order is to be set aside.
Therefore, this Writ Petition is allowed in the
following manner:
1. Ext.P3 order is set aside.
2. The 1st respondent/authorised officer is
directed to reconsider Ext.P2 Form - 5
application in accordance with law. The
authorised officer shall either conduct a
personal inspection of the property or,
alternatively, call for the satellite pictures, in
accordance with Rule 4(4f) of the Rules, at
the cost of the petitioner, if not already called
for.
3. If satellite pictures are called for, the
application shall be disposed of within three
months from the date of receipt of such
2025:KER:83070
pictures. On the other hand, if the authorised
officer opts to personally inspect the
property, the application shall be considered
and disposed of within two months from the
date of production of a copy of this judgment
by the petitioner.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
SKS
Judgment reserved NA
Date of Judgment 03/11/25
Judgment dictated 03/11/25
Draft judgment placed 04/11/25
Final judgment uploaded 04/11/25
2025:KER:83070
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14837/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P-1 A TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT
DATED 6-6-2022 ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P-2 A TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 5 APPLICATION
DATED 26-8-2022 FOR THE EXCLUSION OF LAND
COMPRISED IN SURVEY NO. 639/PT 2 OF
VELUTHOOR VILLAGE IN THRISSUR TALUK TO
EXCLUDE AN EXTEND OF 5.46 ARES IE 13.5
CENTS OF LAND FROM THE FINALIZED DATA
BANK
Exhibit P-3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE
1ST RESPONDENT IN ORDER NO. 3833/2023
DATED 14-12-2023
Exhibit P-4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE 5TH
RESPONDENT DATED 31-7-2023
Exhibit P-5 A COLOR PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PROPERTY OF THE
PETITIONER DATED NIL
