IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN WEDNESDAY, THE 14^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 25TH MAGHA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 34988 OF 2023 PETITIONERS:

1 P. KUNHIRAMAN NAIR AGED 69 YEARS S/O. RAMAN NAIR, RESIDING AT RAM NIVAS, THADAPARAMBA, PO. NELLIKODE, KOZHIKODE, PIN – 673

016.

2 SUJITH RAM PARAYIL AGED 40 YEARS S/O. KUNHIRAMAN NAIR, RESIDING AT RAM NIVAS, THADAPARAMBA, PO. NELLIKODE, KOZHIKODE, PIN – 673

016.

BY ADVS.

P.A.HARISH SANIKA.V.S.

V.V.SURENDRAN DIVIN V.VIJAYAN RESPONDENTS:

1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PO. CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE-, PIN – 673 020.

2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KOZHIKODE OFFICE OF THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PO.

CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE-, PIN – 673 020.

3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ELATHUR OFFICE OF THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PO. ELATHUR, KOZHIKODE-, PIN – 673 303.

BY ADV.

SMT.R.DEVI SHRI, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT Ext.P6 application of the petitioner in Form No.7 of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy and Wetland Act, 2008 (for short, the ‘Act’) was rejected by the 2^nd respondent, Revenue Divisional Officer by Ext.P8 stating that, as per the report of the Village Officer, the property is recorded as ‘nanja’ in the village register and there is ‘neerchal’ in the property and change of nature of land would affect the nearby paddy cultivation and the environment. The petitioner preferred an appeal against the said order under Section 27B of the Act and the 1^st respondent, District Collector rejected the same vide Ext.P10 stating that, the property of the petitioner is waterlogged and there is a neerchal in the property and if Form No.7 application is allowed, that would adversely affect the cultivation in the area.

2. Section 27A(2) of the Act mandates that the Revenue Divisional Officer shall pass orders on the request for a change of nature of unnotified land after considering the report of the Village Officer concerned and after ensuring that there is no disruption to the free flow of water to the neighbouring paddy lands, if any, through such water conservancy measures as is deemed necessary and that if the area of such parcel of land where the application is allowed is more than 20.2 Ares, ten percent of such land shall be set apart for water conservancy measures. Section 27A(4) further mandates that if the application is allowed, the Revenue Divisional Officer shall ensure that the reclamation of unnotified land shall not adversely affect the cultivation of paddy or any other corps, in the adjoining land and shall specify such water conservancy measures as is necessary to ensure such cultivation.

3. Rule 12 of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008 (for short, ‘the Rules, 2008’) deals with the procedure for change of nature of unnotified land, as provided in Section 27A of the Act 2008 Rule 12(4) provides that on receipt of an application under Form 6 the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) shall forward the application to the Village Officer concerned and the Village Officer, in turn, shall conduct an enquiry on the application and submit a report before the RDO and Rule 12(5) mandates that the Village Officer shall also report whether if a change of nature of the land is permitted, it will cause any obstruction to the free flow of water to the nearby paddy fields, if any. The Rules further provide that if the extent of the property is more than 20.2 Ares, the report of the Agricultural Officer should also be obtained by the RDO as to the effectiveness of water conservancy measures that the applicant is proposing to implement in the property. A perusal of the Act and the Rules, 2008 reveals that the only aspect that should be ascertained by the RDO while considering a Form 6 application seeking permission to change the nature of the unnotified land is whether such change of nature of land w