Administrative bodies must strictly adhere to statutory mandates, including conducting inspections, when making decisions about land use applications.

JUDGMENT :

C.S.DIAS, J.

The writ petition is filed to quash Exts.P11 and P13 orders and direct the 2^nd respondent to allow the petitioner request to convert the description and nature of the land covered in Ext.P2 deed, in the Basic Tax Register.

2. The petitioner is a member of the Scheduled Tribe Community and has no land of his own. The Government of Kerala had sanctioned Rs.75,000/- to the landless and homeless persons of the community to purchase 3 cents of land with road access and water under the scheme for the upliftment of the Schedule Caste Community. By making use of the said amount, the petitioner has purchased 2.0235 Ares of land comprised in Re-Survey No.41/65 in Engapuzha Village, Thamarassery Taluk, covered under Ext.P2 purchase deed. The property is a converted land. There are residential buildings near the said property. The petitioner was made to believe that the property is classified as “thottam”. After the purchase, the petitioner constructed a small house in the property. The 8^th respondent has numbered the building as 134A and the petitioner has been remitting the building tax. In 2020, the Government allotted a house under the Life Housing Scheme. The 8^th respondent on a verification of the petitioner’s documents, to allot funds and to issue a building permit, found that the petitioner’s property is classified as ‘paddy land’ and is included in the data bank maintained under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 and the Rules framed thereunder (‘Act’ and 'Rules' in short). Consequently, the petitioner submitted an application in Form 5 under Rule 4(4d) of the Rules. However, by Ext.P11 order, the 4^th respondent rejected the application. The petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 27B of the Act. But, by Ext.P13 order, the 2^nd respondent rejected the appeal on the ground that there is no provision to challenge an order rejecting a Form 5 application. The said order is challenged in this writ petition. By interim order dated 11.02.2025, this Court permitted the petitioner to file a Form 1 application to construct a residential building under Section 9 of the Act. By Ext.P14 Government order, persons who have been sanctioned houses under the life scheme are granted an exemption. But, by Ext.P15 order, the 7^th respondent has rejected the Form-1 application. Exts.P11, P13 and P15 orders are illegal and arbitrary. Hence, the writ petition.

3. In the statement filed by the 5^th respondent, it is, inter-alia, contended that pursuant to the Form-1 application filed by the petitioner, the Local Level Monitoring Committee conducted an inspection of the property. The Village Officer was also present at the time of the inspection. It is found that there are no trees in the property. There is also a temporary shed, approximately 7-8 years old, in the property. The Village Officer has reported that the petitioner and his family do not have any other converted land for house construction. The petitioner is included in the life mission beneficiary list of the Puduppady Panchayat. So the committee had recommended to construct a house with high foundation. But, the Agricultural Officer opposed the committee decision, as the applicant had purchased the property after 12.08.2008. As per the Revenue Department order dated 17.02.2020, application in Form-1 can only be filed by persons who own paddy lands before 12.08.2008. The writ petition is devoid of any merit and is liable to be dismissed.

4. Heard; the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel for the 8^th respondent Panchayat.

5. The petition