2025:KER:31657 WP(C).NO.13187/2017 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P. THURSDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 20TH CHAITHRA, 1947 WP(C) NO. 13187 OF 2017 PETITIONER: JOSEPH D'CUNJA, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O. LAWRENCE D'CUNJA, ILLICKAL HOUSE, PALLIPORT P.O., MUNAMBAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN- 683 515. BY ADVS. M/S.P.M.BENZIR, JAICE JACOB & G.G.MANOJ RESPONDENTS: 1 THE LANE REVENUE COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONERATE OF LAND REVENUE, PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDING, OPPOSITE MUSEUM, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695033. 2 THE SUB COLLECTOR, FORT KOCHI, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, FORT KOCHI, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682001. 3 A.S. UNNIKRISHNAN, PADINJATTUKKARA HOUSE, PALLIPURAM, PALLIPORT P.O., ERNAKULAM, PIN-683515. SMT.SURYA BINOY, SR.GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10.04.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2025:KER:31657 WP(C).NO.13187/2017 2 MOHAMMED NIAS C. P. , J. ========================= W. P. (C) No. 13187 of 2017 ========================= Dated this the 10th day of April, 2025 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is stated to be the owner of 55 cents of land comprised in Kuzhuppilly Village of Kochi Taluk, covered by Ext.P1 deed. The petitioner submits that the said property is not included in the data bank prepared under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008. When he attempted to level the property to prevent waterlogging, the 3rd respondent, who is on inimical terms with the petitioner, filed a complaint before the Revenue Divisional Officer, which resulted in Ext.P6 order, invoking the powers under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967, ordered to restore the land on the premise that the property was wrongly shown as 'purayidam' in the resurvey. He also directed the Additional Tahsildar to take appropriate action to rectify the mistake as per GO(P) No. 500/2010 within 30 days. 2. Ext.P6 was challenged before the Land Revenue Commissioner, which resulted in Ext.P8, wherein the Land Revenue Commissioner remanded the 2025:KER:31657 WP(C).NO.13187/2017 3 matter for further consideration to the Revenue Divisional Officer, virtually affirming the findings. It is challenging Exts.P6 & P8, this writ petition is filed. 3. A statement has been filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent stating that the land in question remains waterlogged and has characteristics of a 'wetland'. It is also stated that the Village Officer's report suggests that the land is now classified as 'nilam'. 4. In view of these contentions, this Court had passed an order on 12.3.2025 as follows: “The learned Government Pleader on instruction submits that the property in issue was earlier described as 'Nilam' in the Basic Tax Register (for short, BTR), but later, it was mistakenly shown as 'Purayidam” thereafter. 2. The respondents are directed to produce a copy of the BTR, which describes the property in question as 'Nilam', within three weeks from today.” 5. A memo has been filed by the learned Government Pleader in response to the above order stating that the entries in the Basic Tax Register show that the Old Sy.Nos. 13/2-1-5, 14/1-3A, and 14/1-3B are shown as 'nilam' and produced the relevant page of the BTR, which showed that the description of the property is shown as 'purayidam' after resurvey but as 'nilam' before that. 6. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and 2025:KER:31657 WP(C).NO.13187/2017 4 the learned Government Pleader, it has to be noticed that the statement filed shows that the property in question has characteristics of a 'wetland. ' At the same breath, it is stated that the property has to be included as 'nilam,. This contention itself is a contradiction, as a wetland cannot be a paddy land and vice versa, as the definition of one in the Act excludes the other. 7. If the respondents are of the opinion that the property was wrongly described as 'purayidam' in the resurvey proceedings, on such error being noticed, the respondents ought to have issued a notice to the petitioner and could have taken further proceedings only after getting a response from the petitioner, the land owner. In the absence of the same, the revenue records as they stand now, which describe the property as 'purayidam' have to be given validity. Though the Land Revenue Commissioner had remitted the matter to the Revenue Divisional Officer, he has practically upheld the findings of the Sub Collector in Ext.P6. 8. Under such circumstances, the impugned orders are quashed, and the writ petition is disposed of as follows: In case the respondents feel that an error has been committed in the revenue records at the time of resurvey, a notice shall be issued to the petitioner, specifically giving details for such assertion on the part of the 2025:KER:31657 WP(C).NO.13187/2017 5 respondents. The petitioner's response will have to be considered, and appropriate steps will be taken thereafter. This shall be done within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till the above exercise is carried out by the respondents, the status quo as of today shall be maintained by both sides. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- MOHAMMED NIAS C. P., JUDGE MMG 2025:KER:31657 WP(C).NO.13187/2017 6 APPENDIX OF WP(C).NO.13187/2017 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT-P1 TRUE COPY OF THE DEED OF WILL NO. 11/III/1986 REGISTERED WITH SRO, KUZHUPILLY. EXHIBIT-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 16/10/2015 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICE, KUZHUPILLY FOR THE PERIOD 2015-16 EXHIBIT-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE BTR IN RESPECT OF THE PROPERTY OWNED BY THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PROHIBITORY ORDER NO. K1-824/2016 DATED 05/04/2016 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT-P5 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT DATED 20/05/2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT-P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.K1-1824/16/K.DIS DATED 24/05/2016 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT-P7 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM DATED 13/06/2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT-P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. L.R.A 1/21977/2016 DATED 16/03/2017 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE R2(A) TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE LAND ANNEXURE R2(B) TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE VILLAGE OFFICER DATED 25.01.2025