The absence of a proper speaking order renders the rejection of a land classification application invalid, requiring reconsideration under applicable rules.

JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed with following prayers:

i. issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing Exhibit P11;

ii. declare that the petitioners are entitled for orders from the 1st respondent allowing change of nature of the property covered by Exhibit P2 Sale Deed, now measuring 18.1 Ares situated in Re-Survey No. 238/01 of Vatakara Village of Vatakara Taluk and further consequential orders to the 2nd and 3rd respondents to make appropriate correction/addition in the BTR Register as Garden Land;

iii. issue a writ of mandamus, other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 1st respondent to pass revised final orders in Exhibit P5 Form 9 Application by allowing change of nature of the property covered by Exhibit P2 Sale Deed, now measuring 18.1 Ares situated in Re-Survey No.238/01 of Vatakara Village of Vatakara Taluk and further direct the respondents 2 and 3 to make appropriate consequential correction/addition in the BTR Register as Garden Land, on assessing the land afresh and continue to accept the Land tax from the petitioners, treating it as Purayidom;

iv. Grant such other reliefs, as this Hon'ble Court shall deem just.

(SIC)

2. Petitioners submitted a Form-9 application in accordance with the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules , 2008. Ext.P5 is the application. Exts.P8 and P10 are the reports of the Village Officer in favour of the petitioners is the submission. Now, as per Ext.P11, the application is rejected without assigning any reason. The petitioners also relied on Exts.P12 and P13.

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

4. This Court perused Ext.P11 order passed in the Form-9 application. I am of the considered opinion that this is not the manner in which a Form-9 application is to be rejected. It is not a speaking order. For that simple reason, I am forced to set aside Ext.P11 order. The authorised officer has to reconsider Ext.P11 in the light of Exts.P8, P10, P12 and P13.

Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of in the following manner: