SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 25275

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V. Kunhikrishnan, J
Dr. Ranjukumar – Appellant
Versus
The Authorised Officer under the Paddy Land and Wet Land Act – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 9485 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shri. Saigi Jacob Palatty
For the Respondents: Sri. Sreejith V S, SR.GP

No conversion fee required under Section 27A of Kerala Paddy Land Act for Form 6 applications, as per precedents.

Headnote:The petitioner challenges a notice demanding conversion fee under the Kerala Paddy Land and Wetland Conservation Act, 2008, specifically Section 27A and Rule 12(9) of the Kerala Paddy Land and Wetland Rules. Essential facts involve a Form 6 application for conversion submitted on 14.10.2024, met with a demand for fee via Exhibit P5 dated 21.02.2026. The Court finds the issue covered by prior judgments holding no conversion fee is payable under Section 27A. The Court frames the issue as whether conversion fee is demandable for Form 6 applications under Section 27A. The ratio decidendi relies on precedents [2023 (5) KHC 242] and [2023 (3) KHC 431], affirming no fee requirement, directly applicable here. The writ petition is allowed; Exhibit P5 set aside, with directions to process the application without fee within one month.

Table of Content
1. petition challenges conversion fee demand under paddy land act. (Para 1 , 2)
2. precedents exempt fee for section 27a form 6 applications. (Para 3 , 4)

JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed with following prayers:

i. To issue a writ of Certiorari and call for the records related to Exhibit P5 and to quash the same.

ii. To issue a Writ of Mandamus order or other appropriate writ or direction directing the 1st respondent to consider and dispose Ext. P4 Form 6 Application filed under Section 27A of the Act which is numbered as 84/2024/7629000 dated 14.10.2024 without insisting / demanding conversion fee under Rule 12(9) of The Kerala Paddy Land And Wet Land Rules forth with.

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.

iv. Permit the petitioner to dispense with the filing of translations of the vernacular documents.

(SIC)

2. Petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P5 noice issued by the 1st respondent demanding conversion fee. The petitioner relied on the judgment of this Court inRevenue Divisional Officer v. Dr.A.V. Sajeev [ 2023 (5) KHC 242 ] and Sumesh U. v. Revenue Divisional Officer, Palakkad [2023 (3) KHC

431]. Hence this writ petition.

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

4. There is no dispute to the fact that the point raised by the petitioner is covered in favour of the petitioner in Dr.A.V.Sajeev’s case (supra) and Sumesh U’s case (supra). If that is the case, the prayer in this writ petition can be allowed.

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

1. Ext.P5 is set aside.

2. The 1st respondent is directed to process Ext.P4 Form-6 application, without insisting fee, if it is otherwise in order, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top