SANIYA MOHAMMED BABU vs THE AUTHORISED OFFICER UNDER THE PADDY LAND AND WET LAND ACT, DEPUTY COLLECTOR (RR)

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 4613

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
SANIYA MOHAMMED BABU – Appellant
Versus
THE AUTHORISED OFFICER UNDER THE PADDY LAND AND WET LAND ACT, DEPUTY COLLECTOR (RR) – Respondent

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY
For the Respondents: GP SMT DEEPA V

Table of Content
1. challenge to fee demand based on previous ruling. (Para 1 , 2)
2. representation by both parties evaluated. (Para 3)
3. court recognizes precedent and rules accordingly. (Para 4)

JUDGMENT

The above Writ Petition (c) is filed with the following prayers:-

“i. To issue a writ of certiorari and call for the records related to Ext. P5 and to quash the same to the extent demanding fee for the existing building in the subject property of the petitioner.

ii. To issue a writ of mandamus order or other appropriate writ or direction directing the 1st respondent, Authorised Officer to finalise Exhibit P4 Form 6 application having No.14/2025/1077213 of the petitioner without insisting for fee for the building sought under Ext. P5 forthwith.

iii. To issue any other writs order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit on the facts and circumstances of the case.”

2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the demand of fee for existing building which according to the petitioner was constructed even before the commencement of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act , 2008. The petitioner relied on the judgment of this Court in Shiji Joshy Vs.

State of Kerala [ 2022 (7) KHC

Click Here to Read the rest of this document