Kerala Conservation Of Paddy Land & Wetland Act | Order Passed On Plea For Changing Nature Of Unnotified Land Appealable U/S 27B: High Court

The Court held that the application for change of nature of unnotified land submitted in Form 6, Form 7, or Form 9 under Rule 12 of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008—are traceable to Section 27A(2) of the Wetland Act and are hence appealable under Section 27 B [Appeal] of the Act.

Justice Viju Abraham delivered the judgment in a writ petition challenging the RDO's rejection of Form 9 application seeking to change the nature of her property. The petitioner argued that the land, though described as paddy land in the Basic Tax Register, was excluded from the notified data bank, and since it had been converted prior to July 4, 1967, no conversion fee was payable under Section 27 A(3) of the Act.

The RDO, however, rejected the Form 9 application under Rule 12(13) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008 for change of nature of unnotified land despite a favourable report from the Village Officer.

The petitioner approached the High Court, contending that no appeal is provided as per Section 27 B of the Act of 2008

After examining the statutory framework, the Court held that, irrespective of whether the application is made in Form 6, Form 7, or Form 9, the RDO's decision thereon is an order under Section 27A(2) [ Change of Nature of unnotified land] . Consequently, the proper course for an aggrieved party is to file an appeal before the District Collector.

The Court distinguished the precedent relied upon by the petitioner, Sakeer Hussain v. State of Kerala, [2020 (5) KLT 450], clarifying that it applied to orders under Section 27A(11), which are not appealable.

The Court thus disposed of the writ petition, directing the petitioners to file an appeal challenging the rejection order before the District Collector. It further directed that if the appeal is filed within a period of three weeks from dthe ate of receipt of the judgment, it shall be treated as one filed within time.

Case Title: Farhana Latheef v Revenue Divisional Officer and Others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 580

Case No: WP(C) 19920/ 2022

Counsel for Petitioner: T K Ajithkumar

Counsel for Respondent: Riyal Devassy