Kerala High Court
Kochumon vs State Of Kerala on 26 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 7TH PHALGUNA, 1942
WP(C).No.5098 OF 2021(J)
PETITIONER/S:
1 KOCHUMON
SON OF HYDERMANKUTTY, AMBALATHUVEETTIL HOUSE,
EDAMUTTOM AMSOM, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR.
2 ABDUL SALAM,
AMBALATHUVEETTIL HOUSE, EDAMUTTOM AMSOM,
CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR.
3 JAMALUDHEEN,
AMBALATHUVEETTIL HOUSE, EDAMUTTOM AMSOM,
CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR.
BY ADVS.
SMT.K.P.SANTHI
SMT.TARA PREM
SMT.NISHA G.THARAMAL
SMT.SARIMOL KAREETHARA
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
FIRST FLOOR, CIVIL STATION, CIVIL LINES ROAD,
AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR, KERALA 680 003.
3 THE TAHSILDAR, THRISSUR TALUK,
TOWN HALL, W PALCE ROAD, OPPOSITE THRISSUR,
CHEMBUKKAVU, THRISSUR, KERALA 680 020.
W.P.(C) No.5098 of 2021
2
4 THE THRISSUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
MUNICIPAL OFFICE ROAD, KURUPPAM, THEKKINKADU
MAIDAN, THRISSUR, KERALA 680 001, REPRESENTED BY
SECRETARY.
R4 BY SHRI. SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL, SC, THRISSUR
CORPORATION
BY SRI.RAVI KRISHNAN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.5098 of 2021
3
W.P.(C) No.5098 of 2021
-----------------------------------------------
JUDGMENT
Petitioners hold a land measuring 10.11 Ares in R.S.No.193/32 in
Ollur Village. Although the land of the petitioners is shown in the revenue
records as 'Nilam.', the same was lying as a dry land when the Kerala
Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 (the Act) came into force.
Earlier, the petitioners had obtained permission from the competent
authority under the Kerala Land Utilization Order for making use of the land
which was held by them, for other purposes. Ext.P4 is the order obtained by
the petitioners in this regard. On 12.01.2021, the petitioners preferred an
application before the third respondent for reassessing the land as dry land
under the Kerala Land Tax Act and also for making appropriate corrections in
the revenue records pertaining to the classification of the land. Ext.P7 is the
application preferred by the petitioners for the said purpose. The grievance
of the petitioners concerns the delay on the part of the third respondent in
taking a decision on Ext.P7 application.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as also the
learned Government Pleader.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners points out that Ext.P7
application is not being disposed of by the third respondent as he maintains
the stand that the petitioners have to obtain orders under Section 27A of the
W.P.(C) No.5098 of 2021
Act after remitting the prescribed fee, for the relief claimed in Ext.P7
application.
4. In Renji K. Paul v. Revenue Divisional Officer, 2019 (2)
KLT 262, this court held that if the holder of a land which is not included in
the data bank prepared under the Act prefers an application for permission
to make use of the land for other purposes under the Land Utilization Order
before the coming into force of Act 29 of 2018, in terms of which Sections
27A and 27C were introduced to the Act, the said provisions cannot be
pressed into service against such a land. In the case on hand, the land of the
petitioners is covered by an order under the Land Utilization Order long
before Act 29 of 2018. In other words, the provisions of Act 29 of 2018
cannot be pressed into service in respect of the land of the petitioners.
Further, in Iype Varghese v. Revenue Divisional Officer, 2020 (5) KLT
403, this Court held that where statutory permission for change of user of
land has been obtained for conversion of a paddy land to a garden land in
terms of the provisions contained in the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, then it
is the obligation of the competent authority under the Land Tax Act to make
a fresh assessment of the land so as to collect the higher land tax for such
converted land and to issue appropriate directions to the officers concerned
to make additional entries in the Basic Tax Register so as to reflect the
nature of the land as garden land/Purayidam in the said Register.
In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the
third respondent to reassess the land of the petitioners, treating the same as
Purayidam/dry land and issue appropriate orders directing the officers
concerned to change the classification of the land in the Basic Tax Register
W.P.(C) No.5098 of 2021
and other revenue records as Purayidam/dry land. This shall be done within
two months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE
rkj
W.P.(C) No.5098 of 2021
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE DATA BANK IN RESPECT OF
10.11 ARES IN R.S.NO. 193/32 (OLD SURVEY
NO. 63/3/ AND 70/3) OF OLLUR VILLAGE,
ISSUED BY AGRICULTURAL OFFICE, OLLUR.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT DATED
17.3.2012 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 9.11.2017
IN WPC NO. 17566 OF 2017 OF THIS HONOURABLE
COURT.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED
21.4.2018 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF FORM 6 APPLICATION DATED
20.8.2019 SUBMITTED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
12.2.2021 SUBMITTED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
12.2.2021 SUBMITTED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
