K. J. MATHEW Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition is filed to quash Ext.P5 order and to direct the 2nd respondent to reconsider Ext.P3 application (Form 5) submitted under Rule 4(d) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008 ('Rules' in short).

(2.) The petitioner is the owner in possession of 19.60 Ares of land comprised in Block No.15 and Re.Sy.No.174/6 of Kidangoor Village, Meenachil Taluk, Kottayam District covered by Ext.P1 land tax receipt. The petitioner's property is a garden land. However, the respondents have erroneously classified the property as 'nilam' and included it in the data bank. In the said background, the petitioner had submitted Ext.P3 application to remove the property from the data bank. However, the 2nd respondent, without independently evaluating the matter and by merely relying on the report WP(C) NO. 37171 OF 2024 of the respondents 4 and 5, has rejected the application by the impugned Ext.P5 order. There has been total non- application of mind in passing the said order. The 2nd respondent has not inspected the property or called for the satellite pictures from the State Institute of Science and Technology as envisaged under Rule 4(4f) of the Rules. Therefore, Ext.P5 order is liable to be quashed.

(3.) The 3rd respondent has filed a statement, inter alia, stating that the respondents 4 and 5 have filed their reports, which prove that the property adjacent to the petitioner's land is a paddy land. The petitioner's property is low lying land, even though there are banana and arecanut plantations. Hence, the application was rejected.