Kerala High Court
Kalpaka Transport Company Pvt.Ltd vs The Deputy Collector (Rr) on 16 September, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
WP(C) NO. 24146 OF 2025 1 2025:KER:68735
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 / 25TH BHADRA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 24146 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
KALPAKA TRANSPORT COMPANY PVT.LTD.,
H6/583, YMCA ROAD, KOZHIKODE, REPRESENTED BY ITS
DIRECTOR, P.V.CHANDRAN, S/O LATE P.V.SAMY, AGED 85
YEARS, PARAYARUKANDATH HOUSE, KERALAKALA, MANKAVU
P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673007
BY ADVS.
SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN
SRI.SREEJITH SREENATH
SMT.RINCY KHADER
SMT.K.V.RAJESWARI
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (RR),
(THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF
KERALA CONSERVATION OF PADDY LAND AND WET LAND
ACT,2008, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR)
COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673020
2 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
KRISHI BHAVAN, OLAVANNA P.O., KOZHIKODE, PIN -
673019
3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
PANTHEERANKAVU VILLAGE, PANTHEERANKAVU P.O.,
KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673019
GP.SMT.DEEPA V
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.09.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 24146 OF 2025 2 2025:KER:68735
C.S.DIAS, J.
---------------------------------------
WP(C) No. 24146 OF 2025
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 16th day of September, 2025
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is the owner in possession of
12.9554 Ares of land comprised in Re-Survey No.120/1 of
Pantheerankavu Village, Kozhikode Taluk, covered under
Ext.P3 land tax receipt. The property is a converted land
and is unsuitable for paddy cultivation. Nevertheless, the
respondents have erroneously classified the property as
'Nanja' (wetland) and included it in the data bank
maintained under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land
and Wetland Act, 2008, and the Rules framed thereunder
('Act' and 'Rules', for brevity). To exclude the property
from the data bank, the petitioner had submitted Ext.P4
application in Form 5, under Rule 4(4d) of the Rules.
However, by Ext.P7 order, the authorised officer has
summarily rejected the application without either
conducting a personal inspection of the land or referring
WP(C) NO. 24146 OF 2025 3 2025:KER:68735
for the satellite pictures as mandated under Rule 4(4f) of
the Rules. Even though the Village Officer, the
competent authority, has recommended the property to
be excluded from the data bank, the authorised officer
has rejected the application. In fact, the 2 nd
respondent/Agricultural Officer has also recommended
the property to be not retained in the data bank. The
impugned order is devoid of any independent finding
regarding the nature and character of the land as it
existed on 12.08.2008 -- the date the Act came into
force. The impugned order, therefore, is arbitrary and
unsustainable in law and liable to be quashed.
2. I have heard the learned Counsel for the
petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.
3. The petitioner's principal contention is that
the applied property is not a cultivable paddy field but is a
converted plot. Nonetheless, the property has been
incorrectly included in the data bank. Despite filing the
Form 5 application, the authorised officer has rejected the
same without proper consideration or application of mind.
WP(C) NO. 24146 OF 2025 4 2025:KER:68735
4. It is now well-settled by a catena of
judgments of this Court -- including the decisions 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] -- that the authorised
officer 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 is to be excluded from the data bank.
5. A reading of Ext.P7 order reveals that the
authorised officer has failed to comply with the statutory
requirements. There is no indication in the order that the
authorised officer has personally inspected the property or
considered the satellite pictures as mandated under Rule
4(4f) of the Rules. In fact, the Village Officer has
recommended the property to be excluded from the data
bank. As per Ext.P6 KSREC report, it is observed that the
property is bordered by a road in the north side and is
WP(C) NO. 24146 OF 2025 5 2025:KER:68735
under vegetation with scattered plantation/trees in South
in the data of 2008. The said land pattern has continued in
the data of 2010 and 2011. Notwithstanding the specific
recommendations in the report of the 3rd respondent as
well as the KSREC report, the authorised officer has
rejected the application by the impugned order. The
authorised officer has not rendered any independent
finding regarding the nature and character of the land as
on the relevant date. There is also no finding whether the
exclusion of the property would prejudicially affect the
surrounding paddy fields. In light of the above findings, I
hold that the impugned order was passed in contravention
of the statutory mandate and the law laid down by this
Court. Thus, the impugned order is vitiated due to errors of
law and non-application of mind, and is liable to be
quashed. Consequently, the authorised officer is to be
directed to reconsider the Form 5 application as per the
procedure prescribed under the law.
In the circumstances mentioned above, I allow the
writ petition in the following manner:
WP(C) NO. 24146 OF 2025 6 2025:KER:68735
(i) Ext.P7 order is quashed.
(ii) The 1st respondent/authorised officer is directed
to reconsider the Form 5 application, in accordance
with the law, by either conducting a personal
inspection of the property or referring to the report of
the Village Officer and Ext.P6 KSREC report. The
above exercise shall be carried out within 60 days
from the date of production of a copy of this judgment
by the petitioner.
The writ petition is thus ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
SCB.16.09.25.
WP(C) NO. 24146 OF 2025 7 2025:KER:68735
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24146/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.47 OF 1997 DATED
06-01-1997 OF S.R.O.MAVOOR
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE
NO.629/25 DATED 26-06-2025 ISSUED BY THE
3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED
26-06-2025 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED ON
23-11-2022 AND TYPED COPY
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT FORWARDED BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED
19-03-2025
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE KSREC DATED
05-03-2025
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.2050/2025 DATED 19-
06-2025 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.3236/2023 DATED 09-
08-2023 ISSUED BY THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL
OFFICER WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF TAHSILDAR
(LR) KOZHIKODE DATED 15-05-2023
