IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. THURSDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 6TH CHAITHRA, 1947 WP(C) NO. 41003 OF 2023 PETITIONER/S: PREMARAJ M.K., AGED 53 YEARS SON OF KRISHNANKUTTY, RESIDING AT PUTHUPPARAMBATH HOUSE, P.O., RAMANATTUKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673633 BY ADVS. ASWINI SANKAR R.S. K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.) T.RAMPRASAD UNNI S.M.PRASANTH T.H.ARAVIND RESPONDENT/S: 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001 2 THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001 3 THE RAMANATTUKARA MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, RAMANATTUKARA, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 676633 4 THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OF THE RAMANATTUKARA MUNICIPALITY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, RAMANATTUKARA, KOZHIKODE , REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, PIN - 673633 5 THE KERALA INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT FUND BOARD, 2DIL¬_FLOOR, FELICITY SQUARE, MAHATMA GANDHI ROAD, STATUE, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS 2025:KER:21104 W.P.(C)No.41003/2023 2 CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, PIN - 695001 6 THE IMPACT KERALA LIMITED (INVESTMENT IN MUNICIPAL AND PANCHAYAT ASSET CREATION FOR TRANSFORMATION KERALA LIMITED) REPRESENTED BY ITS PROJECT DIRECTOR 2ND FLOOR, MUNICIPAL HOUSE BUILDING, NEAR CHINMAYA VIDYALAYA, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695010 7 THE TAHSILDAR, KOZHIKODE TALUK, TALUK OFFICE, NH 212, CIVIL STATION, ERANHIPPALAM, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673020 8 THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001 BY ADV SHRI.MOHAMMED SHAH, SC, RAMANATTUKARA MUNICIPALITY SMT. AMMINIKUTTY K. , SR.GOVT.PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11.03.2025, THE COURT ON 27.03.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2025:KER:21104 W.P.(C)No.41003/2023 3 JUDGMENT The petitioner is aggrieved by a construction carried out by the Ramanattukara Municipality in the property having an extent of 41.442 Ares comprised in Re-survey Nos.295/2 and 2961A1 of Ramanattukara Village. According to the petitioner, the property where the construction is being carried out by the Municipality is a ‘paddy land’ as defined under Section 2(xii) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 in which the construction is not permissible. As no proper orders are obtained from the competent authorities to enable them to carry out such construction, this writ petition is preferred by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs: “i) To declare that the construction of the Municipal building in lands bearing R.S No. 29512 and 296/ AL of Ramanattukara Village in Kozhikode District is totally illegal and made in contravention of the provisions of the Kerala Conversion of Paddy Land and Wetland Act and therefore, liable to be deiclared bad, illegal and forthwith demolished; ii) To declare that the construction of a building in a paddy and wetland without obtaining permission and adversely affecting the environment, air and atmosphere is violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India; iii) To issue a Writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents to immediately stop the construction of the building by the Ramanattukara Municipality in the lands bearing R.S. No. 295/2 2025:KER:21104 W.P.(C)No.41003/2023 4 and 296lA1 of Ramanattukara Village in Kozhikode District as the safie is not in public lnterest and utterly malafide and will cause financial loss to the public iv) To issue a Writ of Mandamus directing respondents 3 and 4 to immediately demolish the construction of the building so far made, which is an illegal construction, forthwith ; v) To dispense with the production of English translation of vernacular documents; vi) To issue such other writs, orders or directions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” 2. A counter affidavit was submitted by the 3rd respondent- Municipality opposing the reliefs sought in the writ petition. According to the 3rd respondent, they are constructing an office building for the Municipality, which is a project undertaken and financed by the Government of Kerala through KIFBI. The said project comes under the “public purpose” as defined under Section 2(xiv) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘Paddy Land Act’). All necessary permits to carry out the construction were obtained by the Municipality and on the strength of the same, the construction is already carried out. 3. An additional counter affidavit was also filed by the 3rd respondent in which, certain documents were also produced to 2025:KER:21104 W.P.(C)No.41003/2023 5 show that, a decision was taken by the Local Level Monitoring Committee (hereinafter referred to as ‘LLMC’) to remove the property from the data bank as evidenced by Ext.R3(A) and on the basis of the said decision, a notification was published as evidenced by Ext.R3(B) after removing the property from the data bank. Exhibit R3(C) is the document evidencing the sanctioning of sufficient amount, to construct the building in question on the said property, set apart from the Special Investment Scheme for the construction of building/facilities through a special Agency. 4. A reply affidavit was also submitted to the counter affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent by the petitioner. The 7th respondent filed a counter affidavit wherein, it is averred that, on the basis of an application submitted by the Municipality before the Sub Collector, Kozhikode for conversion of an extent of 41.422 Ares of land in Re-survey No.295/2, 296/1A1 in Ramanattukara Village for building construction, the Sub Collector, Kozhikode had submitted a report to the Government 2025:KER:21104 W.P.(C)No.41003/2023 6 stating that, by conversion of this land there would not be any obstruction to the smooth flow of water to the adjacent paddy fields. Based on the above report, Agricultural (NCA) Department has issued G.O. (RT) No.124/2022/Agri dated 16.02.2022, which is produced as Ext.P4, granting sanction for conversion of the said property under section 27(A)(9) of Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act. It is further averred that, on the basis of the said order, the Municipal Secretary, Ramanattukara submitted Form A before the 7th respondent for making necessary changes in the revenue records of this land. When seeking legal advise of the matter, the District Law Officer, Kozhikode opined that, since the order was issued by Agricultural (NCA) Department and land conversion as well as changes in sub division of land are related to Revenue Department, an order from Revenue Department is essential in this case, otherwise it will lead to many problems in future regarding conversion of land, subdivision of land etc. For that reason, the said matter is now pending consideration. 5. Heard Sri.K.Ramakumar, the learned Senior Advocate 2025:KER:21104 W.P.(C)No.41003/2023 7 for the petitioner, Sri. P.A. Muhammed Shah, the learned Standing Counsel for the Municipality and Smt. Amminikutty, the learned Government Pleader for the respondents 1 and 2. 6. The main challenge raised by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner is that, the construction being carried out by the Municipality in the said property, is in violation of the provisions contained in the Paddy Land Act and it is an admitted fact that the property where the construction being carried out, was a paddy land, originally included in the data bank and in the revenue records the same is described as such. The learned Senior counsel brought the attention of this Court the definition of “paddy land” as contained in Section 2(xii), prohibition on conversion or reclamation of paddy land as contemplated under section 3 and section 11, and various other provisions relating to the procedure to be followed in the matter of reclamation/conversion. According to the learned Senior counsel, from the documents itself, it is evident that, the property is a paddy land and, therefore, the Municipality could not have carried 2025:KER:21104 W.P.(C)No.41003/2023 8 out any construction on the said property. The said contention was stoutly opposed by the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent. 7. After carefully going through the materials placed on record and hearing the counsels on either side, I find that the relief sought by the petitioner cannot be granted for the reasons hereinafter mentioned. Of course, it is true that, the property was included as paddy land in the data bank originally prepared by the authorities concerned. It is discernible from Annexure R3(A) that, on the basis of the application submitted by the Municipality, the Local Level Monitoring Committee had taken a decision as early as on 13.11.2018, to remove the property from the data bank. From the contents of Ext.R3(A), it is evident that such a decision was taken after conducting an inquiry by LLMC by physically verifying the same, and they were convinced that the property is not liable to be included in the data bank either as a “paddy land” or as a “wetland”. On the basis of the decision taken by the LLMC, a notification was issued as early as on 07.02.2020 2025:KER:21104 W.P.(C)No.41003/2023 9 vide Ext.R3(B) after removing the property of the petitioner from the data bank. As far as the restriction contained in Sections 3 and 11 of the Paddy Land Act are concerned, the same are applicable only in respect of the properties included in the data bank, either as a paddy land or as a wetland. 8. The specific contention raised by the learned Senior Counsel is that, the fact that, the property was originally included in the data bank itself would indicate that, it is a property coming within the definition of ‘Paddy Land’ under section 2(xii) of the Paddy Land Act, therefore no construction should have been made. However, it is to be noted that, as per the provisions of the Act, the LLMC is empowered to remove the property which is wrongly included in the data bank either as a “paddy land” or as a “wetland”. In this case, even though the property was originally included in the data bank, acting upon the application submitted by the 3rd respondent, the LLMC had taken Ext R3 (A) decision after being convinced of the fact that the entry of the property in the data bank was erroneous. Such a decision was implemented 2025:KER:21104 W.P.(C)No.41003/2023 10 by issuing a statutory notification as evidenced by Ext.R3(A). As per Rule 4(4) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules (hereinafter referred to as ‘Paddy Land Rules), the notification of the data bank in relation to a local self government institution has to be published by that Local Self Government institution itself. In this case, on the basis of a decision so taken by the LLMC as evidenced by Ext.R3(A), a statutory notification was published by the Municipality which is the competent authority in this regard. Therefore, the property which is a subject matter of this writ petition, even though originally included in the data bank, was removed from the data bank by the competent authority by following the legal procedure in this regard. Therefore, to that extent, there cannot be any illegality in the matter of conversion of the property. 9. The next aspect to be considered is whether the mere fact that the property was excluded from the data bank would enable the Municipality to carry out construction on the property. It is to be noted that, once the property was removed from the data 2025:KER:21104 W.P.(C)No.41003/2023 11 bank, the said property would become an “unnotified land” as defined under section 2(xviiA) of the Paddy Land Act which reads as follows: “["(xviiA) "unnotified land" means the lands within the area of jurisdiction of the Committee which have been included as paddy land or wetland in the basic tax register maintained in Village Offices, but are not notified as paddy land or wetland under sub-section (4) of section 5 or where data bank has not been published under the provisions of clause (i) of sub section (4) of section 5, the lands which have already been filled up on the date of commencement of this Act and are not paddy land according to the report of the Kerala State Remote Sensing Centre and the Local Level Monitoring Committee or where the report of the Kerala State Remote Sensing Centre is not available, lands which are not paddy land according to the report of the Local Level Monitoring Committee” 10. Of course, section 14 of the Paddy Land Act contemplates for prohibition in granting licence/permit for carrying out any activity or construction on a paddy land or a wetland or an unnotified land. However, section 27A contemplates for the procedure to be followed to change the nature of of unnotified land. As far as the 3rd respondent is concerned, the sub-section (8) of Section 27A is relevant, which reads as follows: “27A(8) : Where conversion of an unnotified land is required for any public purpose, the Revenue Divisional Officer shall submit a report to the Government outlining the measures to be 2025:KER:21104 W.P.(C)No.41003/2023 12 adopted to ensure that the reclamation shall not disrupt the free flow of water to the neighbouring paddy lands, if any, and shall suggest such water conservancy measures as is necessary to ensure this.” 11. As per the said provision, the conversion of an unnotified land is permissible for public purpose and such permission can be obtained on the basis of the report of the Revenue Divisional Officer, submitted to the Government, outlining the measures to be adopted to ensure that the reclamation would not disrupt the free flow of water to the neighbouring paddy lands. Sub-section (9) of section 27A enables the Government to issue permission to reclaim an unnotified land for a public purpose upon receiving a report under sub-section (8). As per the proviso to sub-section (9), if the area of such parcel of land where the application is allowed is more than 20.42 Ares, ten percent of such land is to be set apart for water conservancy measures. Section 14 contemplates a prohibition for carrying out construction on an unnotified land, whereas, section 27A deals with the change of nature of an unnotified land, and sub-sections 8 and 9 referred to above specifically provide for the 2025:KER:21104 W.P.(C)No.41003/2023 13 manner in which such conversion can be permitted for public purpose. 12. In this regard, the expression 'public purpose' is also to be considered which is contained in section 2(xiv) and it reads as follows: “2(xiv) "public purpose" means purposes [for the schemes and projects] undertaken or financed by the Central - State Governments, Government-Quasi-Government Institutions, Local Self Government Institutions, [statutory bodies or other schemes and projects] as may be specified by the Government from time to time” Thus, it is evident that, the public purpose means the purposes for the schemes and projects undertaken or financed by the Central – State Governments, Government – Quasi – Government Institutions, Local Self Government Institutions, statutory bodies or other schemes and projects as may be specified by the Government from time to time. In this case, it is to be noted that Ext.R3(C) is the proceedings of the Chief Executive Officer of KIFBI, which would indicate that, the construction carried out by the 3rd respondent Municipality was under a scheme sponsored by the Government. Admittedly, the proposed construction is for 2025:KER:21104 W.P.(C)No.41003/2023 14 establishing an office building for a Municipality. Therefore, it is evident that, the construction and the purpose of which the construction is being carried out, are coming under the definition of 'public purpose' as defined under section 2(xiv) of the Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act. 13. Exhibit P4 is a Government order issued invoking the power under subsection 9 of Section 27A of Paddy Land Act. It is evident from Ext.P4 that the same was issued under the provisions referred to above, acting upon the report of the Sub Collector and also the representatives of the District Collector as well as Agricultural Officer. The contents of the same would indicate that, the relevant aspects which ought to have been taken into account while granting permission were considered and since the extent of property is higher than 20.42 Ares of land, 10% of the property was directed to be set apart for water conservancy measures. Thus, it is evident that, the 3rd respondent has obtained a valid permission by virtue of Ext.P4 under subsections (8) and (9) of section 27A 8 of the Paddy Land 2025:KER:21104 W.P.(C)No.41003/2023 15 Act, as the purpose for which the construction was being made comes under the definition of 'public purpose' as defined under section 2(xiv) of the Paddy Land Act. 14. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner contends, by specifically highlighting the averments contained in the 7th paragraph of Ext.P4 that, it is not a proper document which confers any right to the Municipality to carry out the construction in view of the fact that, the same was not obtained with any concurrence from the Revenue Department. However, I am of the view that, the said contention also cannot be accepted. It is true that, Ext.P4 was issued by the Department of Agriculture and in the said order there is no reference to any concurrence from the Department of Revenue. The expression 'Government' is defined under Section 2(vii) of the Act as per which 'Government' means State of Kerala. No specific reference to a particular department is mentioned therein. Moreover, in the preamble of the Paddy Land Act, 2008, it is clearly mentioned the purpose of enactment. It is specified as follows: 2025:KER:21104 W.P.(C)No.41003/2023 16 “ …. AND WHEREAS, the Government are stasfied that it is expedient, in public interest, to provide for the conservation of paddy land and wetland and to restrict the conversion or reclamation thereof, in order to promote agricultural growth, to ensure food security and to sustain ecological system in the State of Kerala” Therefore, the competence of the Department of Agriculture to take decisions cannot be challenged, as the focus is mainly on the agricultural growth, food security etc. 15. The specific contention of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners is that, since the matters relating to the change in the revenue records are coming within the jurisdiction of the Revenue Department, in the absence of the concurrence from said Department, the nature of the property cannot be changed as per the orders issued by the Department of Agriculture. However, on carefully going through the scheme of the Act, it is evident that the proceedings contemplated under the Act are mainly at the instance of the officers of the Agricultural Department. Moreover, in none of the provisions in the Paddy Land Act, any concurrence from the Department of Revenue is contemplated. In the absence of any stipulation that any concurrence of the Revenue Department is necessary, it cannot 2025:KER:21104 W.P.(C)No.41003/2023 17 be concluded that due to the lack of concurrence from the said Department, the orders passed by the Agricultural Department cannot be enforced. On the other hand, it is to be noted that, Section 27C deals with the procedure to be followed for effecting changes in the records, the said provision reads as follows: “27C. Change in records (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the lime being in force or in any judgement, decree or order of any Court, Tribunal or any other Authority, wherever a part of a survey number or subdivision is permitted to be converted under Sections 8, 9,10 or 27Aof this Act, a new subdivision shall be created for the extent for which such orders for conversion are issued. (2) Where the paddy land or un-notified land is duly converted as per the provisions of this Act, the Tahsildar shall reassess the land tax under Section 6A of the Kerala Land Tax Act 1961 (13 of 1961) and make necessary entries in revenue records relating to such lands, (3) Where such changes are recorded in revenue records, the number and date of the order and the authority granting sanction, the survey number of the lands for which sanction has been accorded, extent of the land in each survey number for which sanction has been accorded and the revised land tax shall be clearly recorded ensuring that the old entries are legible. (4) Tahsildar shall conduct periodical checks to ensure that changes in revenue records are in accordance with sub-section (3). 2025:KER:21104 W.P.(C)No.41003/2023 18 (5) No attempt shall be made to alter or change or modify the revenue records relating so the paddy land or wetland or unnotified land otherwise than in accordance with sub- section (3).” 16. Section 27C contemplates for the steps to be taken after the order for converting the land as per Section 27A is passed. It contemplates a detailed procedure as to how the change is to be effected and the same does not provide for a concurrence of any particular Department. Therefore, in the absence of any specific stipulation requiring an order from the Revenue Department, Ext.P4 order issued by the Agricultural Department has to be accepted and acted upon. It is true that, in the averment made by the 7th respondent in the counter affidavit, there is a reference to the legal opinion received by them with regard to the necessity of concurrence from the Revenue Department. However, it was only a legal opinion, and in the absence of any legal provisions supporting the said opinion, the same cannot be treated as a legal impediment for implementing Ext.P4 decision while following the procedure contemplated under 2025:KER:21104 W.P.(C)No.41003/2023 19 Section 27C. In such circumstances, after taking note of all the relevant aspects, I find that, the constructions carried out by the 3rd respondent in the property referred to above were after satisfying all the legal requirements as contemplated under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act and no illegalities are found. Therefore, I do not find any ground to allow the reliefs sought in this writ petition and accordingly this writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE pkk 2025:KER:21104 W.P.(C)No.41003/2023 20 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 41003/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF MINUTES NO. 1 IN A MEETING OF RAMANATTUKARA MUNICIPAL COUNCIL HELD ON 17..07..2017 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 16..08..2023 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RAMANATTUKARA MUNICIPALITY Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION NO. R3/9300/23 DATED 13..09..2023 ISSUED BY THE STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER/SUPERINTENDENT OF THE RAMANATTUKARA MUNICIPALITY Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF G.O.(RT) NO. 124/2022/AGRI DATED 16..02..2022 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF PETITION DATED 30..10..2023 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RAMANATTUKARA MUNICIPALITY Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION NO. G4-11282/23 DATED 10..11..2023 SENT BY THE SECRETARY OF THE RAMANATTUKARA MUNICIPALITY Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE NO.1.2023 DATED NIL ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, RAMANATTUKARA TO ONE SANKUTHALA Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF PETITION DATED 01..11..2023 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE VILLAGE OFFICE Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION VO NO. 50/23 DATED 18..11..2023 ISSUED BY THE STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER & VILLAGE OFFICER, RAMANATTUKARA Exhibit 10 TRUE COPY OF PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE 2025:KER:21104 W.P.(C)No.41003/2023 21 ILLEGAL CONSTRUCTION OF THE RAMANATTUKARA MUNICIPAL OFFICE IN A PADDY LAND Exhibit P11 PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE ILLEGAL CONSTRUCTION OF CONSTRUCTION OBSTRUCTING THE SMOOTH FLOW OF WATER Exhibit R3(A) A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30.11.2018 ISSUED BY THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, RAMANATTUKARA TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT SECRETARY Exhibit R3(B) A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE GAZETTE NOTIFICATION NUMBER A3/1172/2020 DATED 07.02.2020 Exhibit R3(C) A TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO. LSG001-06/APR-1/2- 2-/KIIFB -PROCEEDINGS OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KERALA INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT FUND BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, DATED 28.07.2020 Exhibit R3(D) A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING EXECUTED ON 31.10.2020 BETWEEN THE 6TH RESPONDENT MANAGING DIRECTOR, IMPACT KERALA LTD, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, KERALA ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNOR OF KERALA AND THE 3RD RESPONDENT SECRETARY, RAMANATTUKARA MUNICIPALITY ON BEHALF OF THE RAMANATTUKARA MUNICIPALITY Exhibit R3(E) A TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT FORM OF HANDING OVER THE SITE DATED 21.02.2022