Kerala High Court
Padmaja M.C vs The District Collector on 17 July, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
WP(C) NO. 17156 OF 2025 1
2025:KER:52910
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 26TH ASHADHA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 17156 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
PADMAJA M.C
AGED 59 YEARS
W/O. SATHEESH KUMAR, RESIDING AT DOOR NO. 3,
5TH FLOOR, SAFIRE BROWN, THE GEM GROVE, OMR, PADUR,
KANCHEEPURAM, TAMILNADU, PIN - 603103
BY ADV SHRI.BINIYAMIN K.S.
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
COLLECTORATE MALAPPURAM, COLLECTORATE ROAD,
UP HILL, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676505
2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
PERINTHALMANNA REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
SHORNUR-PERINTHALMANNA ROAD, SHANTI NAGAR,
PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679322
3 THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (DM)
COLLECTORATE MALAPPURAM, COLLECTORATE ROAD,
UP HILL, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676505
4 THE THAHSILDAR (LR)
NILAMBUR TALUK OFFICE, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 679329
5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
NILAMBUR VILLAGE OFFICE, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 679329
WP(C) NO. 17156 OF 2025 2
2025:KER:52910
6 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
NILAMBUR KRISHI BHAVAN, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 679329
7 KERALA STATE REMOTE SENSING AND ENVIRONMENT CENTRE
(KSREC)
1ST FLOOR, VIKAS BHAVAN, NEAR LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY,
UNIVERSITY OF KERALA SENATE HOUSE CAMPUS, PMG,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR,
PIN - 695033
BY SMT.DEEPA V, GP
SRI.VISHNU S CHEMPANTHIYIL, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 17.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 17156 OF 2025 3
2025:KER:52910
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 17th day of July, 2025
The petitioner is the owner in possession of 6
Ares and 72 sqm of land comprised in Survey No.145/1-8
in Nilambur Village, Nilambur Taluk, covered under
Ext.P1 land tax receipt. The property is a converted
land. It is not suitable for paddy cultivation. However,
the respondents have erroneously classified the property
as ‘paddy land’ and included it in the data bank. To
exclude the property from the data bank, the petitioner
had submitted Ext.P3 application in Form 5 under Rule
4(4d) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and
Wetland Rules, 2008 (‘Rules’ in short). But, by the
impugned Ext.P5 order, the authorised officer has
perfunctorily rejected Ext.P3 application, without
inspecting the property directly or calling for satellite
images as envisaged under Rule 4(4f) of the Rules. He
has also not rendered any independent finding regarding
the nature and character of the property as on
WP(C) NO. 17156 OF 2025 4
2025:KER:52910
12.08.2008. Hence, Ext.P5 order is illegal and arbitrary,
and is liable to be quashed.
2. Heard; the learned counsel for the petitioner
and the learned Government Pleader.
3. The petitioner’s specific case is that, her property
is a converted land. It is not suitable for paddy
cultivation. But, the property has been erroneously
classified in the data bank as paddy land. Even though
the petitioner had submitted a Form 5 application, to
exclude the property from the data bank, the same has
been rejected by the authorised officer without any
application of mind.
4. In a host of judicial pronouncements, this
Court has emphatically held that, it is the nature, lie,
character and fitness of the land, and whether the land is
suitable for paddy cultivation as on 12.08.2008 i.e., the
date of coming into force of the Act, are the relevant
criteria to be ascertained by the Revenue Divisional
Officer to exclude a property from the data bank (read
WP(C) NO. 17156 OF 2025 5
2025:KER:52910
the decisions of 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 and others (2021 (1) KLT 433)).
5. Ext.P5 order establishes that the authorised
officer has not directly inspected the property or called
for the satellite images as envisaged under Rule 4(4f) of
the Rules. He has also not rendered any independent
finding regarding the nature and character of the
property as on 12.08.2008, or whether the removal of
the property from the data bank would adversely affect
the paddy cultivation in the locality. Instead, by solely
relying on the report of the Agricultural Officer, the
impugned order has been passed. Thus, I am satisfied
that the impugned order has been passed without any
application of mind, and the same is liable to be quashed
and the authorised officer be directed to reconsider the
WP(C) NO. 17156 OF 2025 6
2025:KER:52910
matter afresh, in accordance with law, after adverting to
the principles of law laid down by this Court in the
aforesaid decisions and the materials available on record.
Accordingly, I allow the writ petition in the
following manner:
(i). Ext.P5 order is quashed.
(ii). The 3rd respondent/authorised officer is
directed to reconsider Ext.P3 application, in
accordance with law. It would be up to the
authorised officer to either directly inspect the
property or call for satellite images, as per the
procedure provided under Rule 4(4f), at the expense
of the petitioner.
(iii) If the authorised officer calls for the
satellite images, he shall consider Ext.P3
application, in accordance with law and as
expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three
months from the date of the receipt of the satellite
images. In case he directly inspects the property,
WP(C) NO. 17156 OF 2025 72025:KER:52910
he shall dispose of the application within two
months from the date of production of a copy of this
judgment.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
NAB
WP(C) NO. 17156 OF 2025 8
2025:KER:52910
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17156/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT BEARING NO.
KL10051203538/2024 DATED 03.04.2024
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE
PUBLISHED DATA BANK OF NILAMBUR
MUNICIPALITY BEARING NO. K.B.N.B.R04/2020
DATED 21.01.2021
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 5 APPLICATION
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED
16.05.2024
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE
6TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 2ND
RESPONDENT/3RD RESPONDENT DATED
07.11.2024
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT DATED 01.01.2025 BEARING FILE
NO.563/2024
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER