1. The three petitioners herein are Companies, said to be engaged in infrastructure development, who had purchased respectively 11.65 acres, 11.86 acres and 3.86 acres of land in the year 2007. The substantive dispute raised is with respect to the nature of the said land purchased, which, as per the revenue records, are described as "paddy land" (nilam). The petitioners claim the land to be outside the purview of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as "Paddy Land Act"). The petitioners were earlier before this Court in three separate writ petitions, which were disposed of by a learned Single Judge directing the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) to consider the applications filed by the petitioners for reclamation of the land for non-agricultural purposes. The provisions of the Paddy Land Act, which were brought into force on 12.08.2008, were noticed and in the background of the petitioners having applied under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 (for brevity "KLU Order") also directed that the authority shall consider first whether the land is a paddy land or wet land as defined under the Paddy Land Act and on finding so,