Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Nandan vs Revenue Divisional Officer, ... on 10 February, 2026

Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan

Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan

                                                2026:KER:13241

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
   TUESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 21ST MAGHA, 1947
                   WP(C) NO. 32897 OF 2025

PETITIONER/S:

          NANDAN
          AGED 64 YEARS
          S/O KODAKKATTIL MADHAVAN, CHITTISSERY, P.O,
          PALIYEKARA, MUKUNDAPURAM THALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT,
          PIN - 680301

          BY ADVS.
          SHRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR
          SMT.P.K.MINIMOLE
          SHRI.A.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR
          SHRI.BAPPU GALIB SALAM
          SHRI.G.MOTILAL
          SMT.SUVARNAKUMARI P.
RESPONDENTS:

    1     REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, IRINJALAKUDA
          CIVIL STATION ANNEXE, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR
          DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 680125

    2     LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE
          REPRESENTED BY THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHI
          BHAVAN, NENMANIKKARA, MUKUNDAPURAM THALUK, THRISSUR
          DISTRICT, PIN - 680301

    3     AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
          KRISHI BHAVAN, NENMANIKKARA, MUKUNDAPURAM THALUK,
          THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680301

          GP SMT PREETHA K K


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
10.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 32897 OF 2025                    2

                                                                  2026:KER:13241
                           P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                    ---------------------------------------------
                         WP(C) NO. 32897 OF 2025
                ------------------------------------------------------
                 Dated this the 10th day of February, 2026

                                   JUDGMENT

The above Writ Petition (C) is filed with the following prayers:

"i. Call for the records relating to Ext. P9 order of the 1st Respondent Revenue Divisional Officer, Irinjalakuda and to quash the same order by issuing a Writ of Certiorari or any other Writs, Orders or Directions.
ii. Declare that the property of the Petitioner having an extent of 11.44 Ares, comprised in Survey No. 332/PT-3 situated at Block 28 of Nenmanikkara Village, Mukandapuram Taluk, in Thrissur District, covered by Ext.P2 Land Tax Receipt is dry/garden land, having all the characterisation of Purayidam and therefore the inclusion of 11.44 Ares of the property in the data bank is liable to be excluded.
iii. Issue such other and further writs, orders or directions as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
iv. Dispense with the filing of the translation of vernacular documents. "

[SIC]

2. The petitioner filed a Form-5 application in accordance with the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules. The same was rejected and the petitioner challenged the same before this Court by filing a writ petition as W.P.(C) No.22338/2022. As per Ext.P6 judgment, this Court set aside that order and directed the authorised officer to reconsider the matter. Again Form-5 application is rejected as per Ext.P9. Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and WP(C) NO. 32897 OF 2025 3 2026:KER:13241 the learned Government Pleader.

4. This Court perused the impugned order. Except extracting the observations and findings in the KSREC report, there no independent consideration of the material available by the authorised officer. This Court in Vinumon v. District Collector [2025 (6) KLT 275], considered this accept in detail, and discussed the manner in which a Form-5 application is to be considered. There is no independent assessment by the authorised officer based on available materials. I am forced to set aside the impugned order once again, and the authorised officer is to be directed to reconsider the matter once again.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:

       (i)     Ext.P9 is set aside.
       (ii)    The 1st respondent/authorised officer is directed to

reconsider the Form-5 application in the light of the judgment in W.P.(C) No.22338/2022 and in the light of the principle laid down by this Court Vinumon's case (supra), as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Sd/-

                                                P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
                                                       JUDGE
  AJ

       Judgment reserved           NA
       Date of Judgment            10.02.2026
       Judgment dictated           10.02.2026
       Draft judgment placed       13.02.2026
       Final Judgment uploaded     17.02.2026
 WP(C) NO. 32897 OF 2025               4

                                                      2026:KER:13241

APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 32897 OF 2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NUMBER 4187/1/2007 DATED 06.07.2007 OF NELLAYI SRO Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 21.04.2022 ISSUED FROM THE VILLAGE OFFICE, NENMANIKKARA Exhibit P3 TRUE COPIES OF PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE NATURE OF THE PROPERTY Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DATED 24/09/2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN PROCEEDINGS NO.

B5-12301/21/R. DIS DATED 17/06/2022 Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 18.03.2024 IN WP(C) 22338/2022 Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. KBN 38/24-25 DATED 10.06.2024 Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 30.07.2025 IN CON. CASE (C) 1398/2025 Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO. RDOIJK/663/2025/D4 (BS-12301/2021) DATED 24.06.2025