The Kerala High Court dismissed two writ appeals filed by the State and revenue authorities regarding the classification of land belonging to Mananchira Township Complex Pvt. Ltd., imposing a cost of ₹25,000 on them for indulging in what it called unfair and unreasonable litigation.
The case was heard by Dr. Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice P.M. Manoj, who criticized the conduct of the State and revenue officials for repeatedly defying the court's directions. The landowner had originally approached the court seeking correction in the land record from paddy field to purayidom (dry land), a classification which was factually accurate and legally justified as the land had been converted prior to the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008, under valid permissions from the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967.
Read Also:- High Court Directs Haryana Govt to Exclude Creamy Layer in Promotion Reservation for SC/ST Employees
The Single Judge earlier directed the authorities to reclassify the land based on decisions in Renji K Paul v. Revenue Divisional Officer and Ipe Varghese v. Revenue Divisional Officer. However, in disregard of this clear order, the Tahsildar passed an order on 18 March 2021, classifying the land as “converted homestead” instead of purayidom.
“The Tahsildar’s conduct was found to be mischievous and in direct violation of binding court directions.”
Read Also:- SC grants right of appeal to complainants of cheque dishonour under CrPC 372
As a result, the company had to file another writ petition (WP(C) No.1397/2024). The Single Judge once again ordered the land to be assessed strictly as dry land, but the Tahsildar reportedly continued to disobey the instructions, issuing yet another contrary order on 11 June 2024. This led the company to initiate contempt proceedings.
“The State must realise that they do not stand in a privileged position vis-a-vis a citizen when it comes to matters of litigation… Their actions… smacks of unreasonable and unfairness for which they must necessarily be put to terms.”
Read Also:- Rajasthan High Court Refuses To Quash Rape FIRs, Cites Fear of Victims and False Marriage Promises
Rather than complying, the State and revenue authorities filed delayed review petitions (RP No.660/2024 and RP No.705/2024), which were dismissed for lack of merit and delay. The State then filed writ appeals, WA No. 1154 OF 2025 and WA NO. 1170 OF 2025, challenging these dismissals.
The Division Bench firmly rejected the appeals, calling out the State’s “unreasonable and unfair” approach to litigation. The Bench reminded that the State is not above the law and must follow fairness in its actions, especially in legal matters involving citizens.
Read Also:- CJI B.R. Gavai: Entry of Foreign Law Firms Will Boost India’s Global Arbitration Standing
The Court not only dismissed the writ appeals but also imposed a cost of ₹25,000, directing that it be paid to the private company within three weeks. The Court further allowed the State to recover this amount from the concerned Tahsildar if found responsible for the delay or misconduct.
“Their actions must be informed by fairness and reasonableness,” the Court stressed, highlighting the importance of accountability in government conduct.
Case Title: State of Kerala V. Mananchira Township Complex Pvt. Ltd. and Connected Case
Case Numbers: WA No. 1154 OF 2025 and WA NO. 1170 OF 2025
Petitioner Counsel: Special Government Pleader Sri. S. Renjith
Respondent Counsel: Sri. Binoy Vasudevan
