Kerala High Court
Kadeeja vs The Revenue Divisional Officer on 24 September, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:71350
WP(C) NO. 3616 OF 2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 / 2ND ASWINA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 3616 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
KADEEJA,
AGED 69 YEARS
D/O MOHAMMED, PUTHUTHOTTIL HOUSE, PATTANITHERUVIL,
ENKEKAD P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680590
BY ADVS.
SHRI.ASOK KUMAR K.P.
SHRI.ABDUL HAMEED RAFI
SHRI.RAKESH S MENON
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
FIRST FLOOR,COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION,
AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR, PIN - 680003
2 THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (DISASTER MANAGEMENT),
FIRST FLOOR,COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION,
AYYANTHOLE,THRISSUR, PIN - 680003
3 LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE,
ADAKKANHERY MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS
CONVENER & AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,WADAKKANCHERY
KRISHI BHAVAN, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680590
2025:KER:71350
WP(C) NO. 3616 OF 2025
2
4 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
KRISHI BHAVAN, WADAKKANCHERY, ENKEKAD P.O.,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680590
5 THE DIRECTOR,
KERALA STATE SATELLITE REMOTE SENSING &
ENVIRONMENT CENTRE, ‘C' BLOCK, VIKAS
BHAVAN,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695033
OTHER PRESENT:
JESSY S. SALIM, GP.SMT.
SRI.VISHNU S. CHEMPAZHANTHIYIL, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL
HEARING ON 24.09.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:71350
WP(C) NO. 3616 OF 2025
3
C.S.DIAS, J.
---------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 3616 of 2025
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 24th day of September, 2025
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is the owner in possession of
27.36 Ares of land comprised in Re-survey No. 27/106 in
Kumaranellur Village in Thalappilly 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 Ext.P7 application in Form 5, under Rule
4(4d) of the Rules. However, by Ext.P9 order, the
2025:KER:71350
WP(C) NO. 3616 OF 2025
authorised officer has summarily rejected the
application without either conducting a personal
inspection of the land or calling for the 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
2025:KER:71350
WP(C) NO. 3616 OF 2025
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], 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.P9 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
2025:KER:71350
WP(C) NO. 3616 OF 2025
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, who in turn has relied on the
recommendation of the Local Level Monitoring
Committee, 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 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
2025:KER:71350
WP(C) NO. 3616 OF 2025
law.
In the circumstances mentioned above, I allow the
writ petition in the following manner:
(i) Ext.P9 order is quashed.
(ii) The 2nd respondent/authorised officer is directed to
reconsider the Form 5, 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 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
dkr
2025:KER:71350
WP(C) NO. 3616 OF 2025
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3616/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P-1 TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO. 2050/1995
DATED 08.05.1995 OF SRO WADAKKANCHERY
EXHIBIT P-2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED
07.08.2024
EXHIBIT P-3 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE
NOTIFIED DATA BANK IN RESPECT OF
KUMARANELLUR VILLAGE
EXHIBIT P-4 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE
GROUND REALITY OF THE LAND
EXHIBIT P-5 TRUE COPY OF THE FAIR VALUE NOTIFICATION
DATED 25.03.2023
EXHIBIT P-6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT DRAFT DATA
BANK
EXHIBIT P-7 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
10.01.2021
EXHIBIT P-8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 09.05.2024
SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P-9 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.06.2024
EXHIBIT P-10 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 21.10.2024
BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT
