Kerala High Court
Remya Dominic vs State Of Kerala on 19 September, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:69986
WP(C) NO. 20116 OF 2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 / 28TH BHADRA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 20116 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
REMYA DOMINIC
AGED 41 YEARS
W/O DOMINIC THALIYAPURAM HOUSE ANKAMLAI KARAYIL
ANKAMALI ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683572
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN
SMT.MAYA S. KUMAR
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE
DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
COLLECTORATE KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT -, PIN -
682030
3 THE SUB COLLECTOR
FIRST FLOOR, KB JACOB ROAD, FORT KOCHI, KOCHI,
KERALA, PIN - 682001
4 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
FORTCOCHIN FIRST FLOOR, KB JACOB ROAD, FORT KOCHI,
KOCHI, KERALA, PIN - 682001
5 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
KRISHI BHAVAN, AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KADUNGALLOOR,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683110
2025:KER:69986
WP(C) NO. 20116 OF 2025
2
6 LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE
REPRESENTED BY ITS AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHI
BHAVAN KADUNGALLUR ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683110
7 THE TAHSILDAR (LR) PARAVUR
FIRST FLOOR, ABOVE THE SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE, NORTH
PARAVUR, KERALA, PIN - 683513
8 VILLAGE OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE VILLAGE OFFICER ALANGAD, KOCHI,
KERALA, PIN - 683511
OTHER PRESENT:
GP.SMT.DEEPA V
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 19.09.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:69986
WP(C) NO. 20116 OF 2025
3
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 19th day of September, 2025
The petitioner is the owner in possession of 2.43
Ares of land comprised in Survey No. 414/11B-6 of
Alangad Village, Paravur Taluk, covered under Ext.P2
land tax receipt. The property is a converted land and is
unsuitable for paddy cultivation. Nevertheless, the
respondents have erroneously classified the property as
'paddy land' 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 a Form
5 application, under Rule 4(4d) of the Rules. However,
by Ext.P5 order, the authorised officer has summarily
rejected the application without either conducting a
personal inspection of the land or calling for the
2025:KER:69986
WP(C) NO. 20116 OF 2025
satellite pictures as mandated under Rule 4(4f) of the
Rules. Furthermore, the 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.
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],
2025:KER:69986
WP(C) NO. 20116 OF 2025
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.P5 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 called for the satellite pictures as mandated under Rule
4(4f) of the Rules. Instead, the authorised officer has
merely acted upon the report of the Agricultural Officer
without rendering 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
2025:KER:69986
WP(C) NO. 20116 OF 2025
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:
(i) Ext.P5 order is quashed.
(ii) The 4th 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 calling for the satellite pictures as provided
under Rule 4(4f) of the Rules, at the cost of the
petitioner.
(iii) If satellite pictures are called for, the application
shall be disposed of within three months from the date of
2025:KER:69986
WP(C) NO. 20116 OF 2025
receipt of such pictures. On the other hand, if the
authorised officer opts to inspect the property personally,
the application shall be disposed of within two months
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
rmm/19/9/2025
2025:KER:69986
WP(C) NO. 20116 OF 2025
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20116/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED NO
530/2017 DATED 28.02.2017
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 14/5/2025
Exhibit P3 THE LOCATION SKETCH DATED 16.0-5.2025
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC
36941/23 DATED 9/11/2023
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF CJRDER PASSED BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT NO.8103/2024 DATED 26.06.2024
