An application for the exclusion of property from the data bank under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act must be granted if inspection proves the land is unsuitable for paddy cultivation and lacks the inherent characteristics of wetland or paddy land.

JUDGMENT  :

P.V. Kunhikrishnan, J.

This writ petition is filed with following prayers:

(I) Issue a Writ of Certiorari and quash Exhibit P-4 order passed by the 1st respondent and its all further proceedings.

(II) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the 1st or 2nd respondent as the case may be to pass fresh order on the Exhibit P-2 application submitted by the petitioner in accordance with Sec. 27-A of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008.

(III). Issue a Writ of mandamus directing the 1st or 2nd respondent as the case may be to delete or exclude petitioner’s property having a total extent of 8.09 ares [20 cents ] of land comprised in Re-Survey 39/1-10p [ old survey 343/1p] of Kolazhi village in Thrissur Taluk in Thrissur Dt. from the data bank on the basis of the Exhibit P-2 application in Form No. 5 submitted by the petitioner and allow the same, within a time frame.

(IV). To dispense with the filing of translation of vernacular documents.

(V). Issue such other relief this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

(SIC)

2. Petitioner filed a Form-5 application in accordance with the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008, and the same was rejected originally. The petitioner challenged the same before this Court, by filing WP(C) No.31469/2022. This Court set aside that order and directed to reconsider the matter. Thereafter Ext.P4 order is passed, again rejecting the Form-5 application. Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed.

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

4. When this writ petition came up for consideration, the counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner want to take out an Advocate Commission to submit a report about the nature of the land. Accordingly an Advocate Commissioner was appointed. A detailed report is filed by the Advocate Commissioner.

5. This Court perused Ext.P4 order. Ext.P4 is mainly based on Ext.P3 KSREC report. The Observations & Conclusion in Ext.P3 is extracted hereunder:

“The analysis has been carried out from all available data sets of toposheet (1967) and different satellite data sets of 2007, 2012, 2016 and 2022 for the survey plot.

As per the toposheet of 1967, the survey plot 39/1was observed as paddy land. The plot bordered by a water body in north east was observed under vegetation in 2007 data. The same landuse patterns were continued in 2012 and 2016 data. The data of 2022 shows the plot under vegetation with a building/structure towards south.”

6. In the KSREC report, it is stated that the plot bordered by a water body in north east was observed under vegetation in 2007 data. The same landuse patterns were continued in 2012 and 2016 data.

7. The Advocate Commissioner was requested to report whether the property of the petitioner is suitable and feasible for paddy cultivation. The same is answered by the Advocate Commissioner in the following manner:

On my inspection, I found that the petitioner’s property is not suitable or feasible for paddy cultivation. The property is landlocked and is abutted by the Thrissur—Shornur State Highway on the western side. The surrounding area is highly urbanised and commercial in nature. 1 did not notice any existing paddy cultivation either in the subject property or in the adjoining properties. On inspection of the nearby areas, I found several commercial establishments, including a Bharat Petroleum petrol pump, beauty parlour, workshop-cum-welding shop, and other commercial and residential buildings.

The property is surrounded by permanent structures and developed land, and there is no visible irrigation source, paddy field connectivity, or agricultural continuity in the vicinity. The existence of the State Highway, commercial establishments, and residential buildings on all sides clearly indicates that the area has lost its agricultural character.

In view of the above physical features, surrounding developments, and abs