[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Ibrahim Kutty Mather vs The Revenue Divisional Officer on 6 April, 2026
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
WP(C).10131/2026 &
conn. Cases 1
2026:KER:30148
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
MONDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL 2026 / 16TH CHAITHRA, 1948
WP(C) NO. 10131 OF 2026
PETITIONER/S:
AMETHYST ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED
REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER DONALD DANIEL
VARGHESE, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. VARGHESE B/001 POONAM
AASTHA POONAM GARDEN UNITECH ROAD BOLINJ,
MAHARASHTRA, VASAI, PIN - 400066
BY ADVS.
SMT.C.K.SHERIN
SMT.BLESSY MARY SEBASTIAN
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, KB JACOB ROAD, FORT
KOCHI., PIN - 682001
2 DEPUTY COLLECTOR (RR)
COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 682030
3 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
KRISHI BHAVAN, VYTILLA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682019
4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
VILLAGE OFFICE, ERNAKULAM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM, PIN -
682312
WP(C).10131/2026 &
conn. Cases 2
2026:KER:30148
OTHER PRESENT:
SMT.DEEPA V,GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 06.04.2026, ALONG WITH WP(C).9966/2026, 9988/2026, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).10131/2026 &
conn. Cases 3
2026:KER:30148
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
MONDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL 2026 / 16TH CHAITHRA, 1948
WP(C) NO. 9966 OF 2026
PETITIONER/S:
IBRAHIM KUTTY MATHER
AGED 84 YEARS
S/O. LATE. K.C.M. MATHER,NOOR MAHAL, ERNAKULAM, PIN
- 682018
BY ADVS.
SMT.C.K.SHERIN
SMT.BLESSY MARY SEBASTIAN
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, KB JACOB ROAD, FORT
KOCHI, PIN - 682001
2 DEPUTY COLLECTOR (RR)
COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 682030
3 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
KRISHI BHAVAN, VYTILLA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682019
4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
VILLAGE OFFICE, ERNAKULAM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM, PIN -
682312
WP(C).10131/2026 &
conn. Cases 4
2026:KER:30148
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 06.04.2026, ALONG WITH WP(C).10131/2026 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).10131/2026 &
conn. Cases 5
2026:KER:30148
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
MONDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL 2026 / 16TH CHAITHRA, 1948
WP(C) NO. 9988 OF 2026
PETITIONER/S:
IBRAHIM KUTTY MATHER
AGED 84 YEARS
S/O. LATE. K.C.M. MATHER,NOOR MAHAL, ERNAKULAM, PIN
- 682018
BY ADVS.
SMT.C.K.SHERIN
SMT.BLESSY MARY SEBASTIAN
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, KB JACOB ROAD, FORT
KOCHI, PIN - 682001
2 DEPUTY COLLECTOR (RR)
COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 682030
3 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
KRISHI BHAVAN, VYTILLA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682019
4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
VILLAGE OFFICE, ERNAKULAM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM, PIN -
WP(C).10131/2026 &
conn. Cases 6
2026:KER:30148
682312
OTHER PRESENT:
SMT.DEEPA V,GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 06.04.2026, ALONG WITH WP(C).10131/2026 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).10131/2026 &
conn. Cases 7
2026:KER:30148
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
--------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 9988, 9966
and 10131 of 2026
--------------------------------------
Dated this the 6th day of April, 2026
JUDGMENT
These writ petitions are connected and therefore, I am
disposing of these writ petitions by a common judgment.
2. The petitioners in these writ petitions
submitted Form-6 applications before the authorized officer in
accordance with Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and
Wetland Rules, 2008. The same was rejected as per the
impugned orders in these writ petitions stating that if the
property is included in the Data Bank, a Form-5 application is
to be submitted.
3. The petitioners relied the judgments of this
Court in Anand Louis v. Haaris Rasheed [2022 (1) KHC 554]
WP(C).10131/2026 &
2026:KER:30148
and Anu Mathew v. Revenue Divisional Officer [2022 KHC
5586]. The petitioner also relied the Division Bench judgment
in Line Properties Private Ltd. v. Revenue Divisional
Officer, Ernakulam [2025 KHC 1637] and also relied the
judgment in Basil v. Local Level Monitoring Committee,
Kizhakkambalam [2024 (1) KHC 28]
4. Heard the learned Government Pleader also.
5. This Court considered the contention of the
petitioners and the learned Government Pleader. In Basil's
case (supra), this Court observed like this:
"9. Admittedly, the final data bank to be prepared should
contain only the details of the property which are paddy land
or wetland as on the date of coming into force of the Act 2008
and there is no provision in the form prescribed for preparation
of the final data bank, the Act and Rules of 2008 and in the
government order referred above to include any other property
which is not a paddy land or a wetland in the data bank. In the
present case, in Ext.P2 draft data bank the property has been
included as converted land. Petitioner has approached the 1st
respondent LLMC seeking to remove the said land from the
data bank for which the petitioner preferred Ext.P3 application.
The LLMC considered the said request pursuant to the
directions issued by this Court and issued Ext.P5
communication intimating that the property should be retained
in the data bank as converted land even after finding that the
property is converted and that there is a residential house in
the property and in the whole of the property there are various
WP(C).10131/2026 &
2026:KER:30148
trees standing. I am of the opinion that the said direction in
Ext.P5 is contrary to the provisions of the Act and Rules and
the Government orders referred to above and the declaration
of law by this Court in Salim C.K's case cited supra. This Court
in Anand Louis v. Haaris Rasheed (2022 (1) KHC 554),
Anu Mathew v. Revenue Divisional Officer (2022 KHC
Online 5586) has even held that in cases where the property
has been shown as converted land in the data bank, there is
not even a requirement for submitting an application in Form 5
before considering an application in Form 6. A perusal of the
Government order dated 31.10.2017 referred to above also
states without any doubt that entries like 'converted land' etc
need not be entered in the data bank and that the officers
mentioned therein i.e., the Agricultural officer and Village
officer are duty bound to conduct a site inspection and be
appraised of the above said factual situation so as to remove
such illegal entries in the data bank."
6. In Line Properties case (supra) also the same
point is considered and the relevant portion is extracted
hereunder:
"6. Even otherwise, the fact that the property was
described in the Data Bank as "reclaimed land", by itself
indicate that, the authorities concerned, had applied their
mind, conducted an enquiry while preparing the Data Bank
and entered into a finding that the property is not a "paddy
land" or a "wetland". Therefore, the entry of the said
property is an erroneous entry as observed above, which
itself is to be removed, without any further enquiry.
xxx
8. In such circumstances, in the light of the principles
laid down by this Court in the above-said decisions, the
respondents are bound to remove the property of the
petitioner from the Data Bank, as the same is entered
therein with a description as converted land. As mentioned
above, it is only an erroneous entry, and the same has to be
WP(C).10131/2026 &
2026:KER:30148
removed. However, since the petitioner has already
submitted Ext.P4 application in Form 5, even though the
same was not necessary, I am of the view that, for issuing
necessary orders in this regard for removing the property
from the Data Bank, the 2nd respondent can act upon
Ext.P4."
7. This Court in W.P.(C.) No. 3788/2026 and
2427/2026 considered the same issue and allowed the writ
petitions. In the light of the above judgment referred above, I
think the finding in the impugned orders will not stand. It is
true that the order passed in a Form-6 application is
appealable. But, when the same is issued in violation of the
dictum laid down by this Court in the above judgments, I think
the impugned orders can be set aside, without relegating the
petitioners to file an appeal.
Therefore, these writ petitions are allowed in the
following manner:
1) Ext.P5 in these writ petitions are set aside.
2) The 2nd respondent/authorised officer in these writ
petitions is directed to reconsider Form-6
WP(C).10131/2026 &
2026:KER:30148
application, in the light of the principle laid down
by this Court in Basil's case (supra) within a
period of two months from the date of receipt of a
certified copy of this judgment.
sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
SKS
Judgment reserved NA
Date of Judgment 06/04/2026
Judgment dictated 06/04/2026
Draft judgment placed 06/04/2026
Final judgment uploaded 06/04/2026
WP(C).10131/2026 &
2026:KER:30148
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 10131 OF 2026
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit -P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 2433/1/2023
DATED 31.03.2023
Exhibit -P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE
NOTIFIED DATA BANK DATED 22.02.2021
Exhibit -P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION IN FORM NO.
6 DATED 08.05.2025
Exhibit -P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 21.08.2025
Exhibit -P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. 581/2026 DATED
23.02.2026 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit -P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN W.PC
NO. 2427/2026 AND W.PC NO. 3788/2026 DATED
05.03.2026
WP(C).10131/2026 &
2026:KER:30148
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 9966 OF 2026
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit -P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED
22.04.2022 FOR THE PERIOD 2022-2023 ISSUED
BY THE VILLAGE OFFICE; ERNAKULAM
Exhibit -P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE
NOTIFIED DATA BANK DATED 22.02.2021
Exhibit -P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION IN FORM NO.
6 DATED 08.05.2025
Exhibit -P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 28.07.2025
Exhibit -P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. 582/2026 DATED
23.02.2026 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit -P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN W.PC
NO. 2427/2026 AND W.PC NO. 3788/2026 DATED
05.03.2026
WP(C).10131/2026 &
2026:KER:30148
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 9988 OF 2026
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit -P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED
27.11.2020 IN RESPECT OF PROPERTY IN SY.
NO. 141/2-6 FOR THE PERIOD 2020-2021
ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICE; ERNAKULAM
Exhibit -P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE
NOTIFIED DATA BANK DATED 22.02.2021
Exhibit -P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION IN FORM NO.
6 DATED 07.05.2025
Exhibit -P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 18.07.2025
Exhibit -P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. 577/2026 DATED
23.02.2026 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit -P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN W.PC
NO. 2427/2026 AND W.PC NO. 3788/2026 DATED
05.03.2026
