SABU THOMAS Vs. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER PUNALUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition is filed to quash Ext.P8 order and direct the 1st respondent to re-consider Ext.P7 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 6.77 Ares of land comprised in Resurvey Nos.271/13 and 271/6 in Block No.012 of Kalayapuram Village, Kottarakara Taluk, Kollam District, covered by Ext.P1 land tax receipt. The petitioner's property is a dry land and is situated on the MC Road highway. The respondents have erroneously classified the petitioner's property as "paddy land" and included it in the data bank. In the said background, the petitioner had submitted Ext.P7 application before the 1st respondent to remove his property from the data bank. However, the 1st respondent, based on the report of the Agricultural Officer that the property is surrounded by paddy fields, has rejected the application by the impugned Ext.P8 order. Ext.P8 order is erroneous, illegal and is passed without any application of mind. Hence, the writ petition.

(3.) Heard; the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.