JUDGMENT :

The writ petition is filed to quash Ext.P2 order and direct the first respondent to re-consider the Form 5 application submitted by the petitioner 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 4.5 Ares of land comprised in Survey No. 105/4-5 of Vazhakkala Village, Malappuram District covered by Ext. P1 sale deed. The petitioner has constructed a house in the said land and the same is a garden land. However, the respondents have erroneously classified the petitioner’s property as ‘Nilam’, and included it in the data bank. In order to remove the property from the data bank, the petitioner had submitted Form 5 application. However, the first respondent solely relying on the report of the second respondent and, without inspecting the property directly or calling for satellite images as envisaged under Rule 4(4f) of the Rules, has erroneously passed the impugned Ext. P2 order. Hence, Ext. P2 is liable to be quashed.

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

4. The petitioner’s case is that, his property is a garden land, which is not su