Kerala High Court
Abdul Rahiman M vs Revenue Divisional Officer on 31 March, 2026
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
WP(C) NO. 12974 OF 2026 1
2026:KER:29310
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
TUESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH 2026 / 10TH CHAITHRA, 1948
WP(C) NO. 12974 OF 2026
PETITIONER/S:
ABDUL RAHIMAN M
AGED 42 YEARS
KABEER MANZIL, UDAYAWAR, OPPOSITE VILLAGE
OFFICE, MANJESWAR, MANJESHWARAM, KASARAGOD
DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 671323
BY ADV SHRI.ADIL.M.H
RESPONDENT/S:
1 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, PUTHIYAKOTTA P.O,
HOSDURG, KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD, KERALA,
PIN - 671315
2 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
UDAYAVAR VILLAGE OFFICE, KUNJATHUR,
NEAR MADA IN NH 66, MANJESHWARA, KERALA,
PIN - 671323
3 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
MANJESHWAR KRISHI BHAVAN, MANJESHWAR-HOSANGADI
OLD HWY, MANJESHWAR, HOSABETTU, KASARAGOD,
KERALA, PIN - 671323
4 THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE
(CONSTITUTED UNDER THE KERALA CONSERVATION OF
PADDY LAND AND WET LAND ACT, 2008), REPRESENTED
BY IT'S CONVENOR, THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
MANJESHWAR KRISHI BHAVAN, MANJESHWAR-HOSANGADI
OLD HWY, MANJESHWAR, HOSABETTU, KASARAGOD
DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 671323
WP(C) NO. 12974 OF 2026 2
2026:KER:29310
5 KERALA STATE REMOTE SENSING AND ENVIRONMENT
CENTRE
REPRESENTED BY IT'S DIRECTOR, 1ST FLOOR, NEAR
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY, VIKAS BHAVAN, UNIVERSITY
OF KERALA SENATE HOUSE CAMPUS, PMG,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695033
GP SMT DEEPA V
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 31.03.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 12974 OF 2026 3
2026:KER:29310
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
---------------------------------------------
WP(C) NO. 12974 OF 2026
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 31st day of March, 2026
JUDGMENT
The above Writ Petition (C) is filed with the following prayers:
"1. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ quashing Exhibit-P3 order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer.
2. Declare that the petitioner's property is not paddy land or wetland within the meaning of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act.
3. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to reconsider the petitioner's Form No.5 application afresh in accordance with law and also quash the subsequent Exhibit-P2 order.
4. Direct the respondents to obtain a satellite report from KSRSEC before passing any fresh orders.
5. Grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.
6. It is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to :
Permit the petitioner to rely upon the translated English versions of the documents originally in vernacular language (Malayalam) produced along with this Writ Petition, and to dispense with the requirement of filing certified/official translations at this stage, in the interest of justice."
[SIC]
2. The petitioner submitted two Form-5 applications under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008 ('Rules', for brevity) and both those applications were rejected by the 1st respondent. The main WP(C) NO. 12974 OF 2026 4 2026:KER:29310 grievance of the petitioner is that the authorised officer has not considered the contentions of the petitioner.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.
4. This Court perused the impugned orders. I am of the considered opinion that the authorised officer has failed to comply with the statutory requirements. The impugned orders were passed by the authorised officer solely based on the report of the Agricultural Officer. There is no indication in the orders 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 [2021 (1) KLT 433], observed that the WP(C) NO. 12974 OF 2026 5 2026:KER:29310 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 orders are 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 orders are to be set aside.
Therefore, this Writ Petition is allowed in the following manner:
1. Exts.P2 and P3 orders are set aside.
2. The 1st respondent/authorised officer is directed to reconsider Form - 5 applications 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.
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 WP(C) NO. 12974 OF 2026 6 2026:KER:29310 production of a copy of this judgment by the petitioner.
4. If the Authorised Officer is either dismissing or allowing the petition, a speaking orders, as directed by this Court in the judgment dated 05.11.2025 in Vinumon v. District Collector [2025 (6) KLT 275], shall be passed.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
AJ
Judgment reserved NA
Date of Judgment 31.03.2026
Judgment dictated 31.03.2026
Draft judgment placed 01.04.2026
Final Judgment uploaded 04.04.2026 WP(C) NO. 12974 OF 2026 7 2026:KER:29310 APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 12974 OF 2026 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit-P1 THE SALE DEED EXECUTED BY POOVAMMA IN FAVOUR OF DR.K.A. KHADER DATED 12/06/2009 IN KANNADA LANGUAGE AND IT'S ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
Exhibit-P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER AS PER FORM.NO.5 DATED 21.04.2025, ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT ALONG WITH THE WRITTEN ORDER.
Exhibit-P3 THE FORM-5 REJECTION ORDER DATED 16/11/2024 OF RDO MANJESHWAR TALUK.
Exhibit-P4 THE ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN
WP(C) NO.32254 OF 2025 DATED
27/01/2026.