[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Fiyas Ibrahim vs The Revenue Divisional Officer on 7 January, 2026
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
W.P.(C) No.44943 of 2025
1
2026:KER:754
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 / 17TH POUSHA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 44943 OF 2025
PETITIONER(S):
FIYAS IBRAHIM
AGED 38 YEARS, S/O MUHAMMED IBRAHIM, KALAKKATTU
HOUSE, KORIMBISSERY, IRINJALAKUDA P.O., REPRESENTED
BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY MUHAMMED IBRAHIM , AGED 79
YEARS, KALAKKATTU HOUSE, KORIMBISSERY,
IRINJALAKKUDA P.O., THRISSUR, PIN - 680121
BY ADVS.
SHRI.ASOK KUMAR K.P.
SHRI.ABDUL HAMEED RAFI
SHRI.RAKESH S MENON
RESPONDENT(S):
1 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
IRINJALAKUDA, 1ST FLOOR COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION
ROAD, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680125
2 LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE
MURIYAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY CONVENER &
AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, MURIYAD KRISHI BHAVAN,
MURIYAD P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680125
3 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
MURIYAD KRISHI BHAVAN, MURIYAD P.O., THRISSUR
DISTRICT, PIN - 680125
BY ADV.:
GP, SMT. NIMA JACOB.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 07.01.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.44943 of 2025
2
2026:KER:754
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
---------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.44943 of 2025
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 07th day of January, 2026
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed seeking the following
reliefs:
"i. Declare that Exhibit P-8 Order is glaringly perverse,
grossly arbitrary and per se illegal;
ii. Call for the records leading to Exhibit P-8 order of rejection
of Form 5 application by the 1st Respondent and issue a Writ
of certiorari or such other appropriate Writ, orders or
directions quashing the same;
iii. Issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ or order or
direction to the 1st respondent to reconsider Exhibit P-7
application through an independent assessment of facts and
circumstances and to pass a reasoned speaking order, either
adverting to the KSREC report or evaluating present ground
realities within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court
in the interest of justice;
iv. To dispense with the production of English Translation of
Malayalam Exhibits produced along with the Writ Petition in
the interest of justice;
v. Render such other orders or directions as this Hon'ble
Court may deem just, fit, proper and necessary in the facts
and circumstances of the case" [SIC]
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P8 order
2026:KER:754
passed by the 1st respondent rejecting Ext.P7 Form-5
application submitted by the petitioner 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 the 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 with the statutory requirements. The
impugned order was passed by the authorised officer
based on the report of the Agricultural Officer. There is
no indication in 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
2026:KER:754
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 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(C) is allowed in the
following manner:
2026:KER:754
1. Ext.P8 order is set aside.
2. The 1st respondent / authorised officer is
directed to reconsider Ext.P7 Form-5
application submitted by the petitioner, in
accordance with the 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
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.
2026:KER:754
4. If the Authorised Officer is either dismissing or
allowing the petition, a speaking order, as
directed by this Court in the judgment dated
05.11.2025 in Vinumon v. District Collector
[2025 (6) KLT 275], shall be passed.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN,
JUDGE
nvj
Judgment reserved NA
Date of Judgment 07.01.2026
Judgment dictated 07.01.2026
Draft Judgment placed 07.01.2026
Final Judgment uploaded 08 .01.2026
2026:KER:754
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 44943 OF 2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P-1 TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.
1211/1/2023 DATED 22.05.2023
Exhibit P-2 TRUE COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY
DATED 11.09.2023
Exhibit P-3 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT
DATED 08.10.2024
Exhibit P- 4 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF
NOTIFICATION BEARING NO. B3/5898/20
DATED 24.11.2020
Exhibit P-5 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF
NOTIFICATION NO.SC3-2697/2022 DATED
08.10.2022
Exhibit P-6 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING
THE GROUND REALITY OF THE LAND
Exhibit P-7 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION IN FORM 5
DATED 03.11.2023 PREFERRED TO THE 1ST
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P- 8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. 448/2024
DATED 23.01.2024 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT
