2025:KER:21334 WP(C) NO. 6795 OF 2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 6795 OF 2025 PETITIONER: ABRAHAM THARAKAN P.A AGED 79 YEARS, S/O. P.K.ABRHAM THARAKAN AYYANATTUPARAYIL, THAIKATTUSSERRY P.O. ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 688528 BY ADVS. RAVI KRISHNAN ANJU P. RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001 2 SUB COLLECTOR & REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER OFFICE OF RDO, ALAPPUZHA, KERALA, PIN - 688001 3 DEPUTY COLLECTOR (DM) OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE ,ALAPPUZHA, KERALA, PIN - 688001 2025:KER:21334 WP(C) NO. 6795 OF 2025 2 4 THE TAHSILDAR(LR) CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 688524 5 VILLAGE OFFICER VAYALAR EAST VILLAGE, PATTANAKADU P.O, CHERTHALA, ALAPUZHA, KERALA, PIN - 688531 6 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER VAYALAR, KRISHI BHAVAN VAYALAR, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN – 688536 BY ADV SMT.PREETHA.K.K, SR.G.P THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2025:KER:21334 WP(C) NO. 6795 OF 2025 3 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the owner in possession of 1 Hectar 70.63 Ares of the property comprised in Survey No. 191/3- A of Vayalar Village in Cherthala Taluk, Alappuzha District. The case of the petitioner is that, despite the fact that the property is not included in the Data Bank, it is being described as a paddy land in the revenue records. In such circumstances, the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 application in Form 7, on 09.04.2021 before the 2nd respondent to classify the property as dry land. As there was delay in disposing of the same, the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P(C) No.36214/2022, which resulted in Ext.P5 judgment, wherein this Court issued a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider the application submitted by the petitioner, within two months. Even though the said judgment was passed as early as on 11.11.2022, even now the said application is not disposed. It is the specific case of the petitioner that, now as per the amendment brought in the provisions of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008, by introducing an authorized officer under 2025:KER:21334 WP(C) NO. 6795 OF 2025 4 Section 2(xvA) of the Act, the 3rd respondent is now assigned with the duties and functions of the 2nd respondent, to take up the applications submitted in Form 7. According to the petitioner, the stand taken by the 3rd respondent is that, the timeline fixed by this Court as per Ext.P5 is not applicable to him as he was not a party to the said judgment and this writ petition is submitted in such circumstances seeking a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider the said application. 2. The learned Government Pleader upon instructions submitted that the 3rd respondent has already sought a report from the Village Officer and the matter is under processing. 3. After hearing both sides, I find that, inaction on the part of the 3rd respondent is not justifiable. Of course, it is true that, in Ext.P5 judgment the 3rd respondent was not a party and a direction was specifically issued to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on the same. Now by virtue of the amendment brought in, in the Act, the 3rd respondent is empowered as the authorized officer and is authorized to carry out the powers exercised by the 2nd 2025:KER:21334 WP(C) NO. 6795 OF 2025 5 respondent. Therefore, the 3rd respondent, by virtue of the said amendment and the conferment of the powers as per the same, had stepped into the shoes of the 2nd respondent. Therefore, the directions issued in Ext.P5 by this court are applicable to the 3rd respondent as well, even though he was not a party to Ext.P5 judgment. In view of the above, the 3rd respondent is under an obligation to comply with the directions issued by this Court in Ext.P5 judgment without insisting for any further direction from this Court. In such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of, directing the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P2 application, as directed by this Court in Ext.P5 within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE scs 2025:KER:21334 WP(C) NO. 6795 OF 2025 6 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6795/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 26.7.2024 ISSUED BY THE VAYALAR EAST VILLAGE OFFICE Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF OFFICIAL GAZETTE DATED 12.11.2020 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION IN FORM 7 DATED 9.4.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 9.4.2021 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.11.2022 IN WP © 36214/2022 Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER NO. GO NO.140/2024 /RD DATED 27.6.2024