Kerala High Court
Anupkumar M. A. vs State Of Kerala on 8 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
MONDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 19TH MAGHA,1942
WP(C).No.21827 OF 2020(C)
PETITIONER/S:
ANUPKUMAR M. A., S/O. DR. S. AIYAPPAN PILLAI,
INDIVARAM HOUSE, ALUVA P. O., ERNAKULAM DIST.,
PIN - 683 101., REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF
ATTORNEY HOLDER, DR. S. AIYAPPAN PILLAI,
AGED 75 YEARS, S/O. SANKARA PILLAI (LATE),
INDIVARAM HOUSE, ALUVA P. O.,
ERNAKULAM DIST., PIN - 683 101.
BY ADV. SRI.AVANEESH KOYIKKARA
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE
DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2 THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONERATE OF LAND REVENUE, PUBLIC OFFICE
BUILDING, MUSEUM JN. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695
033.
3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM
CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD POST, ERNAKULAM - 682
030.
4 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, FORT KOCHI
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, KB JACOB RD, FORT
KOCHI, KOCHI HEAD POST, ERNAKULAM - 682 001.
-2-
W.P.(C). No. 21827 of 2020
5 TAHSILDAR, KANAYANNUR
KANAYANNUR TALUK OFFICE, PARK AVENUE, NEAR
SUBHASH PARK, MARINE DRIVE, ERNAKULAM H. O.
POST, ERNAKULAM DIST., PIN - 682 011.
6 VILLAGE OFFICER, VAZHAKKALA
VAZHAKKALA VILLAGE OFFICE, NEAR NGO QUARTERS,
THRIKKAKKARA, BMC POST, ERNAKULAM DIST., PIN
- 682 021.
OTHER PRESENT:
SMT K.AMMINIKUTTY -SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 08.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
-3-
W.P.(C). No. 21827 of 2020
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, who is the owner in possession of
property having an extent of 04.18 Ares comprised in Block
No.9 of Vazhakkala Village in Ernakulam District, has filed this
writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 5th respondent
to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3, the application for re-
assessment/fresh assessment and by correcting the property
as dry land in BTR, without insisting for the order from the
Revenue Divisional Officer as per Section 27A of the Kerala
Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 within a
time frame fixed by this Court, after giving an opportunity of
being heard the petitioner.
2. The petitioner had filed Ext.P1 application dated
15.12.2016 invoking the provisions under Clause 6 of the
Kerala Land Utilisation Order seeking permission to utilise the
property for purposes other than paddy cultivation. Pursuant
to the directions contained in the judgment of this Court in
W.P.(C) No.559 of 2017, the 3rd respondent issued Ext.P2
W.P.(C). No. 21827 of 2020
order dated 27.05.2019 permitting utilisation of that land for
purposes other than paddy cultivation, in exercise of the
powers under Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order.
Now, Ext.P3 application filed by the petitioner under Section
6A of the Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961 for re-assessment/fresh
assessment of land tax in respect of the said property is
pending consideration before the 5th respondent Tahsildar.
3. On 15.10.2020, when this writ petition came up for
admission, the learned Government Pleader was directed to
get instructions. On 22.01.2021, the learned Government
Pleader sought time to get instructions as to whether Ext.P3
application made by the petitioner is still pending
consideration before the 5th respondent Tahsildar.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
also the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for
respondents.
5. The learned Senior Government Pleader, on
instructions, would submit that Ext.P3 application made by the
petitioner is pending consideration before the 5th respondent
W.P.(C). No. 21827 of 2020
and the said respondent will take an appropriate decision on
that application within a time limit to be fixed by this Court.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit
that consideration of that application may be with notice to
the petitioner.
7. Having considered the submissions made by the
learned counsel on both sides, this writ petition is disposed of
by directing the 5th respondent Tahsildar to consider and pass
appropriate orders on Ext.P3 application made by the
petitioner under Section 6A of the Kerala Land Tax Act, for re-
assessment/fresh assessment of the land tax, in respect of
the property in question, within a period of one month from
the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, with
notice to the petitioner and after affording him an opportunity
of being heard.
7. In State of U.P. v. Harish Chandra [(1996) 9
SCC 309] the Apex Court held that no mandamus can be
issued to direct the Government to refrain from enforcing the
provisions of law or to do something which is contrary to law.
W.P.(C). No. 21827 of 2020
In Bhaskara Rao A.B. v. CBI [(2011) 10 SCC 259] the
Apex Court reiterated that, generally, no Court has
competence to issue a direction contrary to law nor can the
Court direct an authority to act in contravention of the
statutory provisions. The courts are meant to enforce the rule
of law and not to pass the orders or directions which are
contrary to what has been injected by law.
8. Therefore, in terms of the directions contained in
this judgment, the 5th respondent Tahsildar shall take an
appropriate decision in the matter, strictly in accordance with
law, taking note of the relevant statutory provisions and also
the law on the point.
No order as to costs.
Sd/-
ANIL K.NARENDRAN
JUDGE
das
W.P.(C). No. 21827 of 2020
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED
DATED 15.12.2016 UNDER THE KLU ORDER
BEFORE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PERMISSION UNDER
THE KLU ORDER ISSUED BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT DATED 27.05.2019.
EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR
RE-ASSESSMENT /FRESH ASSESSMENT OF
LAND TAX SUBMITTED BEFORE 5TH
RESPONDENT THROUGH POST ON 04.06.2019.
