Kerala High Court
Nikhil K.V vs State Of Kerala on 28 October, 2025
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
W.P.(C) No.17960 of 2024
1
2025:KER:81459
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 / 6TH KARTHIKA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 17960 OF 2024
PETITIONER(S):
1 NIKHIL K.V,
AGED 35 YEARS, REPRESENTED BY THE POWER OF ATTORNEY
HOLDER SRAJILAL K.P., S/O.KAMALA,CHALUPARAMBATH,
VAIKKILISSERY, CHORODE,VADAKARA, CALICUT,
PIN - 673104
2 LENSY,
AGED 35 YEARS, REPRESENTED BY THE POWER OF ATTORNEY
HOLDER SRAJILAL K.P S/O.KAMALA, CHALUPARAMBATH,
VAIKKILISSERY, CHORODE, VADAKARA, CALICUT,
PIN - 673104
BY ADVS.
SHRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ
SMT.APARNA NARAYAN MENON
SMT.CHINNU MARIA ANTONY
RESPONDENT(S):
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE
DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695001
2 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
OFFICE OF REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
VADAKARA,KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673101
3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
COLLECTORATE KOZHIKODE, WAYANAD ROAD, CIVIL
STATION, ERANHIPPALAM, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673020
W.P.(C) No.17960 of 2024
2
2025:KER:81459
4 AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
KRISHI BHAVAN EDACHERI, EDACHERY P.O., KOZHIKODE,
PIN - 673502
5 THE SECRETARY,
EDACHERI GRAMAPANCHAYAT OFFICE, ORKKATTERI,
PURAMERI, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673106
6 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
VILLAGE OFFICE, EDASSERRY, VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE,
PIN - 673520
7 LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE,,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENOR, KOZHIKODE MUNICIPAL
CORPORATION OFFICE, KOZHIKODE, MUNICIPAL
CORPORATION, CALICUT BEACH, NEAR AKASH VANI
KOZHIKODE, MANANCHIRA,KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673032
BY ADV.:
GP SMT JESSY S SALIM
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 28.10.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.17960 of 2024
3
2025:KER:81459
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
---------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.17960 of 2024
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 28th day of October, 2025
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:
"i. To issue a writ of certiorari quashing Exts. P7,P11,P12 and P13 as unjust, illegal and arbitrary; ii. To declare that the nature of the property described in Ext. P1 application is not a paddy/wetland under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 and that the petitioners are entitled to convert the said land for house construction; iii. To issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent no. 3 to consider Ext. P15 appeal submitted by the petitioner, within a time frame fixed by this Hon'ble Court;
iv. To issue a writ of mandamus directing the 2 nd respondent to reconsider the application of the petitioners by recalling Ext. P12 order and after hearing the petitioners afresh;
v. To issue such other orders, directions or writs as may be prayed for under the facts and circumstances of the case;
vi. To dispense with filing of the translation of vernacular W.P.(C) No.17960 of 2024 4 2025:KER:81459 documents." [SIC]
2. The petitioners are aggrieved by Ext.P12 order passed by the 2nd respondent rejecting Ext.P1 Form-5 application submitted by the petitioners under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008 ('Rules', for brevity). The main grievance of the petitioners is that the authorised officer has not considered the contentions of the petitioners.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader.
4. This Court perused the impugned order. Except extracting the definition clause of paddy field, there is no consideration of the contention of the petitioners. I am of the considered opinion that the authorised officer has failed to comply with the statutory requirements. The impugned order was passed by the authorised officer based on the report of the Agricultural Officer. There is no indication in the order that the W.P.(C) No.17960 of 2024 5 2025:KER:81459 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 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 order is not W.P.(C) No.17960 of 2024 6 2025:KER:81459 in accordance with the principle laid down by this Court in the above judgments. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned order is to be set aside.
Therefore, this Writ Petition(C) is allowed in the following manner:
1. Ext.P12 order is set aside.
2. The 2nd respondent / authorised officer is directed to reconsider Ext.P1 Form - 5 application submitted by the petitioners, 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 W.P.(C) No.17960 of 2024 7 2025:KER:81459 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 production of a copy of this judgment by the petitioner.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN,
JUDGE
nvj
Judgment reserved NA
Date of Judgment 28.10.2025
Judgment dictated 28.10.2025
Draft Judgment placed 30.10.2025
Final Judgment uploaded 31.10.2025
W.P.(C) No.17960 of 2024
8
2025:KER:81459
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17960/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 5 APPLICATION
DATED 28.09.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS'.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE TABLE OF EDACHERI
DESAM COMPRISING OF LAND
IDENTIFICATION DETAIL.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.A-
172/2015/KSREC/005561/23 DATED
21.09.2023 ALONG WITH REPORT ON LAND USE CHANGE ISSUED BY KERALA STATE REMOTE SENSING & ENVIRONMENT CENTRE.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 21.06.2022 IN WP(C)20123/2022 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.J.C1.1285/22 DATED 17.08.2022 ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY, EDACHERI GRAMAPANCHAYAT.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER 315VO/98/2022- SVO/VA1 DATED 09.05.2022 SUBMITTED BY VILLAGE OFFICER TO RDO.
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT ISSUED BY AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, EDACHERI DATED 05.05.2023.
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.F1/2219/2022 DATED 21.06.2022 ISSUED BY THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, VADAKARA.
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.F1/2219/2022 DATED 23.08.2022 ISSUED BY THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, VADAKARA.
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.F1-2219/22 DATED 30.08.2022 ISSUED BY THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER.
W.P.(C) No.17960 of 20249
2025:KER:81459 Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED TO THE 1ST PETITIONER BY THE RDO DATED 30.08.2022.
Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF RDO, VADAKKARA, FILE NUMBER 3257/2020 DATED 03.07.2023 ISSUED BY RDO, VADAKARA. Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF THE EDACHERI AGRICULTURE'S OFFICER'S REPORT DATED 14.12.2022.
Exhibit P14 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 11.07.2023 FILED BEFORE THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LR), KOZHIKODE.
Exhibit P15 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 17.10.2023 BEFORE THE COLLECTOR.