K. Ramanathan v. Revenue Divisional Officer, Thrissur; Local Level Monitoring Committee Kolazhy Gram Panchayat; Agricultural Officer Kolazhy, Thrissur District

# `IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM` ## `PRESENT` ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 22[ND] DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 3RD PHALGUNA, 1945 ``` ## `WP(C) NO. 6684 OF 2024` ## `PETITIONER:` ``` K. RAMANATHAN AGED 72 YEARS S/O SARASWATHY AMMA, KAMATH HOUSE, VIYYUR, KOLAZHY P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680010 ``` ``` BY ADVS. ASOK KUMAR K.P. ALEXANDER K.C. ABDUL HAMEED RAFI RAKESH S MENON ``` ## `RESPONDENTS:` - `1 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER FIRST FLOOR,COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR, PIN - 680003` - `2 LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE KOLAZHY GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER & AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KOLAZHY KRISHI BHAVAN, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680010` - `3 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER KRISHI BHAVAN, KOLAZHY, KOLAZHY P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680010.` ``` SMT.DENI SHRI.R., GOVERNMENT PLEADER ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` WP(C) NO.6684 OF 2024 ``` 2 ## P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------ ## W.P.(C) No.6684 of 2024 ------------------------------------Dated this the 22[nd ] day of February, 2024 ## JUDGMENT The above Writ Petition is filed with the following prayers: “I) Declare that Exhibit P-7 Order is against law, arbitrary and per se illegal; ii) Call for the records leading ding to Exhibit 7 order of rejection of Form 5 application by the 1[st] 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 1[st] respondent to reconsider Exhibit P-6 application along with Ext. P9 adverting to Ext.P-8 KSREC report and arrive at a decision whether the petitioner's land is cultivable with paddy as on 12.08.2008 despite land user change, within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court in the ``` WP(C) NO.6684 OF 2024 ``` 3 ## 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; **==> picture [37 x 12] intentionally omitted <==** 2. Petitioner is in possession of 4.71 Ares of land comprised in Survey No.36/1/11 and 1.76 Ares & 2.02 Ares respectively comprised in Re-Survey Nos.36/1-10 and 47/1-2 of Kolazhy Village, Thrissur Taluk, is the submission. The petitioner is in possession of the property based on Exts.P1 and P2 documents. The revenue records including the Basic Tax receipts reveal that earlier the petitioner’s land belongs to the classification of paddy land. According to the petitioner, the property of the petitioner is included in the data bank without any basis. Hence, the petitioner ``` WP(C) NO.6684 OF 2024 ``` 4 submitted a Form - 5 application as per the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Rules, 2008. It is the submission of the petitioner that after a long period, he came to know that the application in Form - 5 was rejected as per order No.D1/15338/2021 dated 13.06.2022. 3. According to the petitioner, he noticed that the land measuring 4.71 Ares comprised in Sy.No.36/11-1 as per Ext.P2 document, for which, he has not applied for exclusion from the data bank, was also rejected. According to the petitioner, the whole land was converted to parambu before 12.8.2008 and the property contains age old coconut palms, mango trees and others trees and vegetation. However, the whole land of the petitioner has now been classified as nilam and the petitioner was unable to use the land for other purposes, is the submission. ``` WP(C) NO.6684 OF 2024 ``` 5 4. According to the petitioner, the 1[st] respondent did not apply his mind while considering the Form - 5 application. It is also submitted that the petitioner procured a KSREC report subsequently on his own, which specifically observed that the aforesaid land was converted prior to the coming into force of the Act, 2008. Hence, this writ petition is filed challenging Ext.7 order by which the Form - 5 is rejected. 5. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. 6. This Court perused Ext.P7 order. Ext.P7 is not a speaking order. Except relying on the report of the Agricultural Officer, the contention of the petitioner is not adverted while passing Ext.P7 order. In Muraleedharan Nair v. Revenue Divisional Officer [2023 (4) KLT 270], this Court observed that, it will not be sufficient for the Revenue Divisional Officer to ``` WP(C) NO.6684 OF 2024 ``` 6 dismiss the application simply stating that Local Level Monitoring Commitee has decided not to remove the land from the Data Bank. 7. The Revenue Divisional Officer, being the competent authority, has to independently assess the status of the land and come to a conclusion that, removal of the land from the Data Bank will adversely affect paddy cultivation in the land in question and nearby paddy lands or that, it will adversely affect sustenance of wetlands in the area and in the absence of such findings, the impugned order is unsustainable. 8. In Aparna Sasi Menon v. Revenue Divisional Officer [2023 (5) KLT 432], this Court observed that the predominant factor for consideration while considering Form - 5 application should be whether the land which is sought to be excluded from the Data Bank is one where paddy cultivation is possible or ``` WP(C) NO.6684 OF 2024 ``` 7 feasible. 9. According to the petitioner, the impugned order is passed in violation of the provisions of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy and Wet Land Act, 2008. It is also submitted that the Revenue Divisional Officer has not applied his mind and simply accepted the report. It is also submitted that, the KSREC report is not properly considered by the Revenue Divisional Officer. The contention of the petitioner is that the status of the land as on 12.08.2008 is not ascertained properly as per scientific process. 10. After going through the impugned order, I am of the considered opinion that, there is some force in the argument of the petitioner. The impugned order is not a speaking order. The contentions of the petitioner is not adverted by the 1[st] respondent while passing the order. Therefore, I am of the considered ``` WP(C) NO.6684 OF 2024 ``` 8 opinion that the impugned order is to be set aside. Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions: a) Ext.P7 order is set aside. b) The 1[st] respondent is directed to reconsider Form-5 application submitted by the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. c) The petitioner is free to submit an application before the appropriate authority for getting the KSREC report within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and if such an application is filed, the authority concerned will do the needful to obtain the same, in accordance with law. If KSREC report is available, the same will be considered by the 1[st] respondent. d) If an application for KSREC report is submitted and the same is called for, the Revenue Divisional Officer need to pass orders in Form - 5 application only within three ``` WP(C) NO.6684 OF 2024 ``` 9 months from the date of receipt of the report from the KSREC. e) The petitioner will produce the certified copy of this judgment along with a copy of the Writ Petition with exhibits before the 1[st] respondent for compliance. Sd/- smv P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE ``` WP(C) NO.6684 OF 2024 ``` 10 ## `APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6684/2024` ``` PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS ``` - `Exhibit P-1 TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO. 631/1/1996 DATED 25.01.1996 OF SUB REGISTRY OFFICE, THRISSUR.` - `Exhibit P-2 COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.629/1996 DATED 25.01.1996 OF SUB REGISTRY OFFICE, THRISSUR.` - `Exhibit P-3 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 09.05.2023 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOLAZHY` - `Exhibit P- 4 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE NOTIFIED DATA BANK IN RESPECT OF KOLAZHY GRAMA PANCHAYATH DATED 14.01.2020` - `Exhibit P- 5 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE GROUND REALITY OF THE LAND` - `Exhibit P-6` - `TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION IN FORM 5 DATED 15.09.2021 PREFERRED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT` - `Exhibit P-7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. D115338/2021 DATED 13.06.2022` - `Exhibit P-8 TRUE COPY OF THE KSREC REPORT DATED 05.01.2024` - `Exhibit P-9 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION IN FORM 5 DATED 22.09.2023`