K.P.Jose vs Pareed
2021 Latest Caselaw 6032 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                              PRESENT

           THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

     FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 30TH MAGHA,1942

       Con.Case(C).No.40 OF 2021 IN WP(C). 5288/2020
  AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 5288/2020(I) DATED 25.02.2020 OF
                       HIGH COURT OF KERALA

PETITIONER/WRIT PETITIONER:

             K.P.JOSE,
             AGED 52 YEARS
             S/O PAULOSE,
             KALATHIPARAMBIL HOUSE,
             NEERIKODU P O,
             ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683511.

             BY ADV. SHRI.ESM.KABEER

RESPONDENT/3RD RESPONDENT IN THE WRIT PETITION:

             PAREED,
             (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER),
             THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, ALUVA-683101.



             SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR, SPL.GP(REVENUE)

     THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 19.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 Cont. Case (Civil) No.40 of 2021
                                         2


                          ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
                    ===========================
                     Cont. Case (Civil) No.40 of 2021
                      [arising out of the judgment dated 25.02.2020
                                in W.P(C) No.5288/2020]
                     ===========================
                        Dated this the 19th day of February, 2021

                                   JUDGMENT

The aforecaptioned contempt of court case has been filed alleging

non-compliance of the directions issued by this Court in Annexure-A1

judgment dated 25.02.2020 in W.P(C)No.5288/2020 filed by the

petitioner herein.

2. Heard Sri.E.S.M.Kabeer, learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner and Sri.K.J.Mohammed Anzar, learned Special Government

Pleader (Revenue) appearing for the respondent-Tahsildar.

3. Today when the matter has been taken up for

consideration, Sri.K.J.Mohammed Anzar, learned Special Government

Pleader (Revenue) appearing for the respondent would submit on the

basis of instructions that the main direction issued by this Court in

Annexure-A1 judgment in W.P(C) No.5288/2020 directing the

Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) concerned to delete the adverse

condition Nos.2 & 5 included in Ext.P-5 (produced in Annexure-A1 Cont. Case (Civil) No.40 of 2021

W.P(C) No.5288/2020), has already been complied with by the RDO

by deleting those conditions. Further that, the remaining direction to

comply with is to be done by the respondent-Tahsildar by passing

orders on the application submitted by the petitioner under Sec.6A of

the Kerala Land Tax Act, for fresh assessment of the subject property.

In that regard, it is pointed out by the learned Special Government

Pleader that the requisite application seeking the benefit of Sec.6A of

the Kerala Land Tax Act was submitted by the petitioner before the

respondent-Tahsildar only in November, 2020. Further that, strict

instructions and directions will be given to the respondent-Tahsildar to

immediately ascertain, as to whether the subject property covered by

the said application filed by the petitioner under Sec.6A of the Kerala

Land Tax Act before the respondent-Tahsildar, is the same or part of

the property covered by the statutory order dated 13.04.2018

(produced as Ext.P5 in Annexure-A1 W.P(C) No.5288/2020), issued by

the RDO, Fort Kochi, granting statutory permission for change of user

of the land under Rule 6(2) of the KLU Order and if it is found that the

subject property covered by the application filed under Sec.6A of the

Kerala Land Tax Act, is the same or part of the property covered by Cont. Case (Civil) No.40 of 2021

Ext.P-5 statutory Rule 6(2) order, then the Tahsildar will pass

necessary orders, for fresh assessment in terms of Sec.6A of the Kerala

Land Tax Act, so as to effect additional entries in the BTR to show

correctly the changed nature of the land as 'purayidam/garden land'

and not either as 'paddy land/Nilam' or as 'സ ഭ വ വ ത യ ന

വര തയ ഭ മ (converted land)' and that steps in that regard, will be

duly completed by the Tahsildar, without any further delay.

4. The abovesaid undertaking made on behalf of the

respondent-Tahsildar, Aluva is recorded. Accordingly, it is ordered

that the abovesaid undertaking given by the respondent-Tahsildar,

shall be duly completed by him by passing orders, as above, without

any further delay, at any rate, within an outer time limit of four weeks

from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

Thereafter, if there is any non-compliance on the part of the

respondent-Tahsildar, then the petitioner will be at liberty to file fresh

contempt of court case in this matter.

5. The Registry will return back certified copy of Annexure-A1

judgment in W.P(C) No.5288/2020 to the petitioner's counsel, if a

request in that regard is made. However, the Registry will ensure that Cont. Case (Civil) No.40 of 2021

photocopy of the said document is placed in the original case file, for

the purpose of maintenance of records.

With these observations and directions and with the said liberty,

the above Cont.Case (Civil) will stand disposed of.

Sd/-

ALEXANDER THOMAS JUDGE

vgd Cont. Case (Civil) No.40 of 2021

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE-A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 25/02/2020 IN WPC NO.5288/2020 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA.

ANNEXURE-A2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 6A OF THE KERALA LAND TAX ACT DATED 6/11/2020.