J. Suresh v. Revenue Divisional Officer, Chengannur and Others

# **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS THURSDAY, THE 5[TH] DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 13TH ASWINA, 1945 ``` ## **`WP(C) NO. 32614 OF 2023`** ## **`PETITIONER:`** ``` J. SURESH, S/O. JANARDANAN, AGED 52 YEARS, SREYAS HOUSE, NANGIARKULANGARA P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN – 690513. BY ADVS. ARUN CHANDRAN HARIMOHAN ANJALY T.A ASWATHY S MENON ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** - `1 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, CHENGANNUR P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN – 689121.` - `2 THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE, KRISHI BHAVAN, CHEPPAD, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN (AGRICULTURAL OFFICER), PIN – 690507.` - `3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, CHEPPAD VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN – 690507.` - `4 AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN, CHEPPAD, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN – 690507.` - `5 DISTRICT COLLECTOR FIRST FLOOR, COLLECTORATE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN – 688001.` ## **`OTHER PRESENT:`** ``` ADV AMMINIKUTTY K -SR GP. ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` W.P.(C) No.32614 of 2023 2 **BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. ==================== W.P.(C) No.32614 of 2023 ====================** _Dated this the 05[th ] day of October, 2023_ ## **JUDGMENT** Petitioner is the owner of 34.96 Ares of property in Survey No.31/12 and 23/9 of Block No.13 of Cheppadu Village, Karthikappally Taluk, Alappuzha District. Challenge is against Ext.P17 order of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chengannur, whereby the petitioner’s request to remove his land from the data bank was refused. 2. Petitioner alleges that his land was converted prior to the enactment of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 (for short, the Act), and it is presently a 'dry land'. However, when the data bank was prepared under Section 5(4)(i) of the Act, his land was wrongly included in it. Since the petitioner requires the land for other purposes, he submitted an application in Form-5, invoking Rule 4(4d) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008 (for short, the Rules). W.P.(C) No.32614 of 2023 3 3. By the impugned order, petitioner’s application was rejected by the Revenue Divisional Officer. Petitioner alleges that the rejection was based solely on the report of the Agricultural Officer, without any site inspection and without any application of mind and is hence not a speaking order. 4. I have heard Sri.Arun Chandran, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt.K. Amminikutty, learned Senior Government Pleader and have also perused Ext.P17 order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer. 5. Petitioner’s application in Form 5 of the Rules was rejected relying on the Agricultural Officer’s report. The said report stated that petitioner’s land need not be excluded from the data bank. Petitioner asserted that the surrounding areas are welldeveloped with multiple buildings and also that the impugned order had not even referred to the suitability of the land for paddy cultivation. 6. In the decision in **Arthasasthra Ventures (India) LLP v. State of Kerala** [2022 (7) KHC 591] and in **Muraleedharan Nair R. v. Revenue Divisional Officer** [2023 (4) KHC 524], this Court had observed that the RDO cannot merely follow the report of the Agricultural Officer or the LLMC without any independent assessment of the status of the land. This Court had also observed that while considering an application filed under Form 5, the W.P.(C) No.32614 of 2023 4 Authority must consider whether the removal of the property from the data bank will affect paddy cultivation in the land and also whether it will affect the nearby paddy fields. Similarly, in the decision in **Aparna Sasi Menon v. Revenue Divisional Officer** [(2023) (6) KHC 83] it has been observed that when the competent authority considers a Form-5 application, the predominant consideration should be whether the land which is sought to be excluded from data bank is one where paddy cultivation is possible and feasible including the existence of irrigation facilities. 7. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the aforementioned specific aspects have not been adverted to, and instead, the application has been rejected solely on the basis of the report of the Agricultural Officer. The RDO could have atleast perused the scientific data for deciding the matter by directing the petitioner to apply for the same or by conducting a site visit. There is also no finding that the land is suitable for paddy cultivation and whether there are any paddy lands in the nearby areas. Since the order is bereft of material particulars and is not issued on any perceivable data, it cannot be said to be a reasoned order. Discernibly, there is no independent application of mind to the relevant circumstances, and hence, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and a fresh consideration be made. 8. In the judgment dated 30.03.2022 in W.P.(C) W.P.(C) No.32614 of 2023 5 No.8409/2017, this Court had specifically directed the 1[st] respondent to obtain reports from the Agricultural Officer as well as from the KSREC, if required, and to take a decision, untrammeled by Sec.13 of the Act. However, from the impugned order, it is seen that the order issued by the District Collector under Sec.13 is referred to in the report of the Agricultural Officer, which has been relied on by the Revenue Divisional Officer. Thus, perusal of the impugned order reveals that the specific directions of this Court in the afore noted judgment has not been complied with in letter and spirit. 9. In the above circumstances, Ext.P17 is quashed and the 2[nd] respondent is directed to reconsider Form 5 application submitted by the petitioner and issue fresh orders, after considering the report of KSREC, and other relevant factors mentioned in rule 4(4f) of the Rules. The order, as directed above, shall be issued within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. The writ petition is allowed as above. **Sd/-** **BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE** Skk//05.10.2023 W.P.(C) No.32614 of 2023 6 ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO.32614 OF 2023`** ## **`PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS:-`** - `EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE CHAIRMAN OF 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 28.05.2015` - `EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR LAND DEVELOPMENT, DATED 06.12.2016` - `EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT IN RESPONSE TO THE APPLICATION PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 08.09.2016` - `EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE UNDATED REPORT (KBCPD 34/2016) OF THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, CHEPPAD` - `EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE UNDATED APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER AGAINST EXHIBIT - P4 REPORT BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR` - `EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR IN RESPONSE TO THE EXHIBIT - P2 STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 14.02.2017` - `EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 8409 OF 2017DATED 14.03.2017` - `EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDERIN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 8409 OF 2017 DATED 22.06.2017` - `EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE UNDATED FORM 5 APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT` - `EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT TO 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 22.09.2020` - `EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF MEETING OF LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE DATED 14.07.2021` - `EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 14.07.2021 FILED BY 2ND RESPONDENT TO 1ST RESPONDENT` W.P.(C) No.32614 of 2023 7 - `EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF G.O [RT] NO. 1168/2021/REV DATED 25.02.2021` - `EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT RENDERED IN W.P.(C) NO. 22495 OF 2021 AND W.P.(C) NO. 8409 OF 2017 DATED 30.03.2022` - `EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF THE UNDATED COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT TO 4THRESPONDENT TITLED AS A1-5126/22` - `EXHIBIT P16 TRUE COPY OF THE UNDATED COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY 4TH RESPONDENT IN RESPONSE TO THE EXHIBIT - P15 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT` - `EXHIBIT P17 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT REJECTING EXHIBIT - P9 APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 01.03.2023` - `EXHIBIT P18 TRUE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PETITIONER'S PROPERTY IN QUESTION` - `EXHIBIT P19 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 08.12.2015` ``` RESPONDENTS’ EXHIBITS:-NIL ``` W.P.(C) No.32614 of 2023 8 ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO.32614 OF 2023`** ## **`PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS:-`** - `Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE CHAIRMAN OF 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 28.05.2015` - `Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR LAND DEVELOPMENT, DATED 06.12.2016` - `Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT IN RESPONSE TO THE APPLICATION PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 08.09.2016` - `Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE UNDATED REPORT (KBCPD 34/2016) OF THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, CHEPPAD` - `Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE UNDATED APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER AGAINST EXHIBIT - P4 REPORT BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR` - `Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR IN RESPONSE TO THE EXHIBIT - P2 STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 14.02.2017` - `Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 8409 OF 2017DATED 14.03.2017` - `Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDERIN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 8409 OF 2017 DATED 22.06.2017` - `Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE UNDATED FORM 5 APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT` - `Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT TO 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 22.09.2020` - `Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF MEETING OF LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE DATED 14.07.2021` - `Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 14.07.2021 FILED BY 2ND RESPONDENT TO 1ST RESPONDENT` W.P.(C) No.32614 of 2023 9 - `Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF G.O [RT] NO. 1168/2021/REV DATED 25.02.2021` - `Exhibit P14 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT RENDERED IN W.P.(C) NO. 22495 OF 2021 AND W.P.(C) NO. 8409 OF 2017 DATED 30.03.2022` - `Exhibit P15 TRUE COPY OF THE UNDATED COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT TO 4THRESPONDENT TITLED AS A1-5126/22` - `Exhibit P16 TRUE COPY OF THE UNDATED COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY 4TH RESPONDENT IN RESPONSE TO THE EXHIBIT - P15 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT` - `Exhibit P17 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT REJECTING EXHIBIT - P9 APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 01.03.2023` - `Exhibit P18 TRUE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PETITIONER'S PROPERTY IN QUESTION` - `Exhibit P19 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 08.12.2015` ``` RESPONDENTS’ EXHIBITS:-NIL ```