This Court in Arthasasthra Ventures (India) LLP v. State of Kerala [2022 (4) KLT OnLine 1222] has held that & Ors.

3. This Court in Arthasasthra Ventures (India) LLP v. State of Kerala [2022 (4) KLT OnLine 1222] has held that the most relevant aspect while WP(C) NO. 43724 OF 2023 : 5 : considering Form-5 application is whether the land in question was a paddy land or a wetland when the Act, 2008 came into force and whether the land is fit for paddy cultivation and if the Revenue Divisional Officer was not satisfied with the available materials, ought to have resorted to scientific data including satellite photographs obtained from KSRSEC. This Court in Muraleedharan Nair v. Revenue Divisional Officer [2023 (4) KLT 270] has held that when the petitioner seeks removal of his land from the Data Bank, it will not be sufficient for the Revenue Divisional Officer to dismiss the application simply stating that the LLMC has decided not to remove the land from Data Bank. The Revenue Divisional Officer being the competent authority, has to independently assess the status of the land and WP(C) NO. 43724 OF 2023 : 6 : come to a conclusion that removal of the land from Data Bank will adversely affect paddy cultivation in the land in question or in the nearby paddy lands or that it will adversely affect sustenance of wetlands in the area and in the absence of such findings, the impugned order is unsustainable.

4. In spite of these categorical declaration by this Court in a catena of judgments as cited above, the application submitted by the petitioner has been rejected solely relying on the decision of the Village Officer not to remove the paddy land from the data bank.

5. In view of the above, Ext.P8 order is set aside. There will be a direction to the 4th respondent to re-consider Ext.P4 application, in accordance with law, at any rate, within a period of two months from WP(C) NO. 43724 OF 2023 : 7 : the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after adverting to the report of the KSREC. If the 4th respondent allows Ext.P4 application, the 4th respondent shall also consider Ext.P6 application of the petitioner in Form-7, in accordance with law, within a period of one month therefrom, if the same is in order. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE SB WP(C) NO. 43724 OF 2023 : 8 : PETITIONER EXHIBITS APPENDIX Exhibit P1 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 1733 OF 2005 DATED 31-03-2005 Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT ISSUED FROM KAKKAD VILLAGE DATED 07-10-2022 Exhibit P3 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE DATA BANK DATED 16-03-2012 Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH THE ACCOMPANYING LETTER AND RECEIPT DATED 05-12-2019 Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT ALONG WITH THE COVERING LETTER DATED 28-04-2020 Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 28-09-2020 Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE CHALLAN FOR REMITTANCE OF FEE DATED 28-09-2020 Exhibit P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF REJECTION PASSED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT AGAINST THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER IN FORM-V ON 09-01-2023 Exhibit P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C). NO. 19946 OF 2020 DATED 07-08-2023