Sahad.A.K vs Revenue Division Officer/Sub ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 10195 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                  PRESENT

               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN

    THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 4TH CHAITHRA, 1943

                       WP(C).No.3243 OF 2021(E)


PETITIONER:

               SAHAD.A.K.
               AGED 38 YEARS
               A.M. KAREEM, ANJIKATH HOSE, COCHIN UNIVERSITY P.O.
               ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 682 022.

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.P.K.SOYUZ
               SRI.E.V.BABYCHAN

RESPONDENTS:

      1        REVENUE DIVISION OFFICER/SUB COLLECTOR
               REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, FORT KOCHI P.O. ERNAKULAM
               DISTRICT 682 001.

      2        THE TAHSILDAR (LR),
               TALUK OFFICE , KANAYANOOR, ERNAKULAM P.O. ERNAKULAM
               DISTRICT 682 011.

      3        THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
               EDAPPALLY SOUTH VILLAGE, KANYANNOOR TALUK,
               PALARIVATTOM P.O. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 682 025.

               BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER:ADV.PAUL ABRAHAM VAKKANAL

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                   2
WP(C).No.3243 OF 2021(E)




                           JUDGMENT

The petitioner is aggrieved by the non-consideration of

his application seeking reassessment of tax on correction of

BTR / revenue records. The petitioner has filed Ext.P2

application, along with Form No.A, in accordance with the

Kerala Land Tax Rules for the purpose. Ext.P3 communication

is issued by the 2nd respondent - Tahsildar intimating the

petitioner that, legal opinion has been sought for regarding

the course of action to be adopted on the petitioner's

application and that reply is awaited.

2. Ext.P1 is the order passed in terms of clause 6 of

the Kerala Land Utilization Order, 1967 ('the KLU order" for

short). Change of user having been permitted as per the said

order, the petitioner is entitled to have the property tax

reassessed and to have entry made in the revenue records

regarding change in the nature of the land. The law in the

said regard has been laid down by this Court in District

Collector V. Fr. Jose Uppani, 2020 (4) KLT 612 (DB),

LLMC Kizhakkamabaklam Grama Panchayat V.

Mariumma and another, 2015 (2) KLT 516, Tahsildar v.

Renjith George, 2020(2) KLT 13 and M/s. SEALAND

WP(C).No.3243 OF 2021(E)

BUILDERS PVT LTD V. The Revenue Divisional Officer,

2020 (5) KLT 56. There is no reason to keep Ext.P2

application, filed under the Kerala Land Tax Act, pending.

3. It is noticed that though Ext.P1 order under clause

6 of the KLU is for an extent of 8.75 ares out of a larger

extent of 10.52 ares, Ext.P2 application under the Land Tax

Act is for the entire extent of 10.52 ares. The application

could be considered only for the extent permitted under

Ext.P1 KLU order.

The petitioner shall approach the 2nd respondent and

make necessary corrections in the application in the said

regard. Such corrected application shall be considered and

orders passed by the 2nd respondent without delay and at any

rate, within a further period of two months thereafter.

Writ Petition is ordered as above.

Sd/-

SATHISH NINAN

JUDGE

rsr

WP(C).No.3243 OF 2021(E)

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE KLU ORDER DATED K2-5466/19 DATED 26.10.2020 BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION ALONG WITH FORM NO.A APPLICATION DATED 10.11.2020.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. H3/18394/2020 DATED 18.01.2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE KERALA LAND REVENUE MANUAL 2019 VOLUME VI.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO. 26693 OF 2020 DATED 02.12.2020.