Sudhi Dharman vs The State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 5440 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN

    MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 26TH MAGHA,1942

                       WP(C).No.2090 OF 2021(I)

                               --------


PETITIONER:

               SUDHI DHARMAN
               AGED 54 YEARS
               S/O. DHARMAN, RESIDING AT FLAT NO. 2 G,
               PARADISE MANIKKYAM, IRINJALAKUDA P.O.
               THRISSUR DISTRICT 680 121.

               BY ADV. SRI.ANOOP.V.NAIR

RESPONDENTS:

      1        THE STATE OF KERALA
               REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE
               DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
               THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

      2        THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
               CIVIL STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT 680 001.

      3        THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
               CIVIL STATION, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT 680
               001.

      4        THE TAHSILDAR,
               MUKUNDAPURAM TAUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT 680 125.


                 ADV. SRI. RAVI KRISHNAN(GOVERNMENT PLEADER)

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
15.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                   SATHISH NINAN, J.
         ==================
               W. P. (C) No.2090 of 2021
         ==================
        Dated this the 15th day of February, 2021

                             JUDGMENT

Property of the petitioner having an extent of

26.95 Ares in Sy. 208/1 and 08.04 Ares in Sy. No.207/2 of Irinjalakuda village is stated to be

lying as garden land since the year 1980. That the

property is not included in the Data Bank is

evident from Ext.P2. Since the BTR records the

nature of the property as 'nilam', the petitioner

had submitted Ext.P3 application dated 12.10.2017

before the third respondent RDO, Thrissur seeking

change of user, addition in BTR and reassessment of

basic tax. This Court as per judgment in WPC

38978/2017 had directed the same to be considered.

2. Subsequently, the Revenue Divisional Office,

Irinjalakkuda came into existence. Though the

application was forwarded by the RDO, Thrissur, to

the RDO, Irinjalakuda (third respondent), orders

are yet to be passed. In the circumstances, this

writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the W. P. (C) No.2090 of 2021

third respondent, to consider and pass appropriate

orders on Ext.P3 under clause-6 of the Kerala Land

Utilization order.

In view of the judgment dated 18.12.2017 in

W.P.(C) No.38978 of 2017 and the fact that the

application under Clause-6 of the KLU was submitted

prior to 30.12.2017, I dispose of this writ

petition directing the third respondent to consider

and pass orders on Ext.P3 application within a

period of two months from the date of receipt of a

copy of this judgment. On conversion being

permitted under the KLU order, a fresh assessment

shall be made and entry in the basic tax register

shall be effected by the land tax authorities.

Sd/-

SATHISH NINAN JUDGE

kns/-

//True Copy// P.S. to Judge WP(C).No.2090 OF 2021

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT N NO. 6740091 DATED 12.04.2017 SUBMITTED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF DATA BANK.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER CLAUSE 6 OF THE KERALA LAND UTILISATION ORDER DATED 12.10.2017, BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT PASSED BY THIS HONBLE COURT IN WPC 38978/17 DATED 18.12.2017.

----------