[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Ajay Bharathan vs The State Of Kerala on 20 January, 2026
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
W.P.(C) No. 2306 of 2026
1
2026:KER:4917
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 / 30TH POUSHA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 2306 OF 2026
PETITIONER/S:
AJAY BHARATHAN
S/O BHARATHAN, RESIDING AT ETTUMURIPARAMBIL,
MANAVALASSERY, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR,
PIN - 680121
BY ADV. SHRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM P O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 695001
2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MINI
CIVIL STATION, IRINJALAKUDA P O, THRISSUR
DISTRICT, PIN - 680121
3 SECRETARY
IRINJALAKUDA MUNCIPALITY, IRINJALAKUDA P O,
THRISSUR, PIN - 680121
4 AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
IRINJALAKUDA KRISHI BHAVAN, IRINJALAKUDA,
THRISSUR, PIN - 680121
5 VILLAGE OFFICER
IRINJALAKUDA VILLAGE OFFICE P O, THRISSUR,
PIN - 680121
W.P.(C) No. 2306 of 2026
2
2026:KER:4917
BY ADV.
GP - SMT. DEEPA V
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 20.01.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No. 2306 of 2026
3
2026:KER:4917
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
---------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 2306 of 2026
------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 20th day of January, 2026
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed seeking the following
reliefs:
"i)Issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate
writ, order or direction to call for the records leading to Ext
P7 , and to quash the same in the interest of justice.
ii)Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate
writ or direction commanding the 2nd respondent to
reconsider the application leading to Ext-P7, on merits,
within prescribed time limits as set by this Hon'ble court, in
the interest of justice.
iii)To exempt the petitioner from producing the
translation of documents which are in vernacular language.
AND
iv)To pass any such or further orders as the petitioner
may seek and this Hon'ble Court deem fit to grant."[SIC]
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed
by the 2nd respondent rejecting the 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
2026:KER:4917
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 solely 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 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
2026:KER:4917
[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 is allowed in the following
manner:
1. Ext.P7 order is set aside.
2. The 2nd respondent/authorised officer is
directed to reconsider the 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.
2026:KER:4917
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.
4. If the authorised officer is either dismissing
or allowing the petition, a speaking order as
directed by this court in Vinumon v.
District Collector [2025 (6) KLT 275], shall
be passed.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN,
JUDGE
DM
Judgment reserved NA
Date of Judgment 20.01.2026
Judgment dictated 20.01.2026
Draft Judgment placed 21.01.2026
Final Judgment uploaded 22.01.2026
2026:KER:4917
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 2306 OF 2026
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF SALE DEED NO.919/2022/1
DATED 10-6-2022 OF THE IRINJALAKUDA S R
O
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF TAX PAID RECEIPT ISSUED
BY THE 5THRESPONDENT DATED 12-5-2025
EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE GAZETTE NOTIFICATION
ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT DATED 19-1-
EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF POSSESSION CERTIFICATE
ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
IRINJALAKUDA DATED 5-11-2025
EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING TAX
RECEIPTS DATED 06/12/2024
EXHIBIT P5 (A) A TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING TAX
RECEIPTS DATED 09/07/2024
EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIELD SKETCH ISSUED
BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER DATED NIL
EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT DATED 03-03-2024
EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS
HON'BLE COURT IN W P C NO 13687 OF 2023
DATED 19.3.2024 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT
EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORTED JUDGMENT IN
2025 (4) K L T PAGE 24 DATED 9.6.2025
