Court ruled that demanding conversion fee was unsustainable under the relevant rules and prior case law.

JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers :

i To issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or directionquashing Exhibit- P5.

ii Issue any appropriate Writ, Order or direction declaring that the Petitioner is not liable to make any payment as provided under Rule 12(9) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules , 2008.

iii Issue Writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the 1st Respondent to consider Exhibit-P4 Application on merits without insisting on the payment of fee.

iv To dispense with the production English translation of Vernacular Exhibits.

v Issue such other Order, or Direction as this Honourable Court may deems just fit, in the circumstances of the case.” [sic] 2. The petitioner submitted an application in Form-6 of the Kerala Conservation of the Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008. By order dated 08.05.2025, the 1^st respondent directed the petitioner to make remittance of Rs.39,600/- as pre-condition for allowing the application. According to the petitioner, the land in question is only having an extent of 7 acres 50 sq.metres and it is below 25 cents as evident by Ext.P1 document. Therefore, the fee demanded is unsustainable.

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

4. Both sides conceded that the point raised by the petitioner is covered in favour of the petitioner in Revenue Divisional Officer v. Dr. AV Sajeev [2023 (4) KLT

331]. If that is the case, this writ petition can be allowed.

Therefore, this writ petition is allowed in the following manner :

1) Ext.P5 is set aside.

2) The 1^st respondent/authorised officer is directed to consider Ext.P4 application, without insisting conversion fee for the land, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

Sd/-