Kerala High Court
Desai Homes vs The District Collector, ... on 5 October, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 13TH ASWINA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 20071 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
DESAI HOMES
D.D.TRADE TOWER, KALOOR-KADAVANTHARA ROAD,
KOCHI-682017, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER,
LUCKACHAN K.P., AGED 58 YEARS, S/O.MATHAI PAILY,
2ND FLOOR, DD TRADE TOWER, KALOOR-KADAVANTHARA ROAD,
KOCHI-682017.
BY ADVS.
K.J.MANU RAJ
K.VINAYA
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
ERNAKULAM, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682030.
2 TAHSILDAR (LR),
KANAYANNR TALUK, PARK AVENUE, ERNAKULAM-682011.
SRI.P.S.APPU, GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 20071 OF 2021
2
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayers:
"(i) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or
direction, directing the 2nd respondent to reassess and reclassifying
the petitioner's, 77.24 Ares of land comprised in Sy.No.235/1 and
236/1 of Punithura Village in Kanayannur Taluk as
Purayidom/dry land in the revenue records on the basis of Ext.P1
KLU order without insisting for payment of any amount
prescribed under Section 27A Kerala Conservation of Paddy & Wet
Land Act 2008.
(ii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or
direction, commanding the 2nd respondent to make consequent
correction in the revenue records inducing the basic tax register to
the affect that petitioner's 77.24 Ares of land comprised in
Sy.No.235/1 and 236/1 of Punithura Village in Kanayannur Taluk
as Purayidom/dry land in place of earlier entry as nilam/paddy
land and to accept land tax in the category of Purayidom and to
show the classification of the said land in the possession certificate
and land tax receipt as Purayidom."
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
Government Pleader.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the
petitioner is the owner in possession of 77.24 Ares of property in Survey
Nos.235/1 and 236/1 of Punithura Village in Kanayannur Taluk of
Ernakulam district. It is submitted that Ext.P1 order was passed under the
provisions of Clause 6(2) of the Kerala Land Utilization Order,1967
WP(C) NO. 20071 OF 2021
permitting the conversion of the property for construction and other
purposes. It is submitted that the said order was passed on 25.01.2021 on an
application preferred by the petitioner on 20.12.2013 as is evident from
Ext.P1 itself. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted Ext.P2 application before
the 2nd respondent seeking a reassessment of the land tax and an inclusion
in the Basic Tax Register showing the nature of the property as dryland on
the basis of Ext.P1. It is submitted that the 2 nd respondent had addressed the
1st respondent seeking clarification as to how the application submitted by
the petitioner is to be considered. It is submitted that Ext.P4 reply has been
issued by the 1st respondent on 26.07.2021 requiring the 2 nd respondent to
take appropriate action in view of the reported decisions of this Court.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court has
repeatedly considered the issue and has found that where applications filed
before the amendment effected to Section 27A of the Kerala Conservation of
Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008 (for short '2008 Act') are allowed, the
further steps have to be taken not in accordance with the provisions of the
2008 Act, but under the provisions of the Kerala Land Tax Act. It was
therefore held that an application under Section 6A of the Kerala Land Tax
Act is maintainable in such cases and on a proper application being made
WP(C) NO. 20071 OF 2021
under Form A, the respondents are duty bound to effect the
alteration/addition in the revenue records by showing the nature of the
property as dryland/garden land/purayidom on the strength of the orders
issued under Clause 6(2) of the Kerala Land Utilization order. It is therefore
contended that the delay on the part of the respondents in considering the
request made by the petitioner in Ext.P2 is completely unjustified and
proper action has to be taken under the provisions of the Kerala Land Tax
Act, 1961 by the 2nd respondent in accordance with law.
5. The learned Government Pleader submits that Ext.P2 request made by
the petitioner is pending before the 2nd respondent and no final orders have
been passed thereon. It is further submitted that it is not clear whether the
petitioner has submitted an application in Form A as provided in the Kerala
Land Tax Rules and that in case no such application is submitted, the same
is also to be submitted which will be considered, in accordance with law,
taking note of the decisions of this Court referred to in Ext.P4 as also the
later decisions of this Court.
6. Having considered the contentions advanced, I am of the opinion that
since Ext.P1 is an order under the Kerala Land Utilization Order passed on
an application preferred as early as on 20.12.2013, the further course to be
WP(C) NO. 20071 OF 2021
adopted by the 2nd respondent is for a consideration of the application
submitted under Section 6A of the Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961 and to process
the same and take appropriate steps for alterations/additions in the
revenue records including the Basic Tax Register by recording the nature of
the property as dryland/garden land as provided in Ext.P1 and for
reassessment of the land tax, accordingly.
7. In case the property of the petitioner, which is the subject matter of
this writ petition, which is shown as 'paddy land/nilam' in the Basic Tax
Register have been converted as 'garden land/dry land/purayidom' on the
strength of Ext.P1 order or even earlier, the entries in the Basic Tax Register
describing the properties as 'nilam or paddy land' would become redundant
and the revenue authorities are statutorily obliged to pass appropriate
orders in exercise of their powers under Section 6A of the Kerala Land Tax
Act. Appropriate steps to secure additional entries in the Basic Tax Register
to show the change in nature of the land as 'garden land/dry land
/purayidom' will have to be taken by the 2nd respondent so that higher
land tax could be levied in respect of the property in accordance with the
conversion.
8. There will, accordingly, be a direction to the 2 nd respondent to take up
WP(C) NO. 20071 OF 2021
the Ext.P2 application preferred by the petitioner. In case no application in
Form A has been submitted by the petitioner, the petitioner shall submit
such an application in due form within a period of one week from the date
of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The said application along with Ext.P2
shall be taken up, taking note of Ext.P1 also, to effect the alterations by
additional entries in the Basic Tax Register to show the change in nature of
the land as 'purayidom/dry land/garden land' and to reassess the
properties accordingly. Appropriate follow up action shall be taken, in
accordance with law, after orders are passed as directed above within a
period of one month thereafter. It is made clear that this Court has
repeatedly held that further applications under Section 27A of the 2008 Act
will not required to be filed in cases like the present one, where orders
under the Kerala Land Utilization order have been passed on applications
filed before 30.12.2017.
This writ petition is ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
ANU SIVARAMAN
JUDGE
NP
WP(C) NO. 20071 OF 2021
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20071/2021
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.DCEKM/7992/2020-
L10 DATED 25.01.2021.
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
29.01.2021 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND
RESPONDENT FOR REASSESSING THE ABOVE SAID
LAND AS PURAYIDOM.
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED
27.02.2021 FROM THE TAHSILDAR TO THE 1ST
RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM TO
TAHSILDAR (LR), KANAYANNUR DATED 26.07.2021.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL
