Entries in the Data Bank must conform to definitions of 'paddy land' or 'wetland'; erroneous entries can be rectified without further applications.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is the owner in possession of a property having an extent of 65.39 Ares comprised in Re.Sy No. 7 & 7/2 in Block No.194 of Edappally North Village, Kanayannoor Taluk. The property of the petitioner is included in the Data Bank, a copy of which is produced as Ext.P3, wherein it was described as ‘converted more than 10 years’. At the same time, the property is described as Nilam in the revenue records.

2. The case of the petitioner is that, the entry of the property in the Data Bank by describing it as a ‘converted land’ by itself is an erroneous entry and therefore, the same has to be removed even without any such application. Despite the same, the petitioner submitted Ext.P4 application in Form 5 in view of the fact that it was insisted upon by the Revenue authorities, on the basis of a circular issued by Land Revenue Commissioner. Thus, Ext.P4 application is now pending consideration.

3. I have heard Sri.Soyuz P.K., learned Counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Amminikutty K., learned Government Pleader.

4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner specifically contended that the purpose of a Data Bank as contemplated under Section 5 (4) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Paddy Land Act’) is to create a database for including the details of the cultivable “paddy land” and “wetland” as defined under Section 2 (xii) and 2(xviii) of the Paddy Land Act. Therefore, the entries in the said Data Bank can only be made with respect to the properties which conform to the features and characteristics of either “the paddy land” or “wetland”. The learned Counsel for the petitioner also brought the attention of this Court to Form 4, which is the prescribed format for publishing the Data Bank as contemplated under Rule 4(4), which also does not contemplate for a column for description of the property as reclaimed land.

5. After carefully going through the documents produced on record and examining the statutory stipulations contained in the Paddy Land Act and the Rules framed thereunder, I find merits in the said contention. This is because, nowhere in the Paddy Land Act, there is any provision to include any property which is not a “paddy land” as defined under Section 2 (xii) or a wetland under (xviii) of the Paddy Land Act. Section 5 (4)(i) provides for the preparation of the Data Bank, which reads as follows:

“(i) to prepare the data-bank with the details of the cultivable paddy land and wetland, within the area of jurisdiction of the Committee, with the help of the map prepared or to be prepared by the State Land Use Board or Centre State Science and Technology Institutions on the basis of satellite pictures by incorporating the survey numbers and extent in the data-bank and get it notified by the concerned Panchayat/Municipality/Corporation, in such manner as may be prescribed, and exhibit the same for the information of the public, in the respective Panchayat/Municipality/Corporation Office and in the Village Office/Officers;

[Provided that any person aggrieved by the entries in the data bank so exhibited, may prefer an application to the Revenue Divisional Officer concerned and the Revenue Divisional Officer shall dispose of such application within a period of three months after following such procedure, as may be prescribed, and in case the Revenue Divisional Officer finds that the land included as paddy land or wetland in the said data bank is not paddy land or wetland, it shall be deemed to have been removed from the data bank.]”

In the said provision, it is specifically mentioned that, the Data Bank has to be prepared with the details of cultivable paddy land and wetland within the area of jurisdiction of the Committee concerned. Therefore, the fact that the property of the petitioner was included in the Data Bank with a description as ‘reclaimed land’ itself is an unwanted and an erroneous entry, which is liable to be removed.

6. Even otherwise, the fact that