Kerala High Court
Parvathy @ Ambujam vs State Of Kerala on 16 September, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
THURSDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021/25TH BHADRA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 25721 OF 2017
PETITIONER:
PARVATHY @ AMBUJAM, AGED 69 YEARS,
W/O M.GOVINDANKUTTY, 'SREEPADAM',
MALAYAMKUMARATH HOUSE, PIRAYIRI P.O.,
PALAKKAD 678 004.
BY ADV SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
PALAKKAD 678 001.
2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
3 THE ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR,
OFFICE OF THE TAHSILDAR,
CIVIL LINES, MANNARKKAD,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT, 678 583.
ADDL.4 DISTRICT SURVEY SUPERINTENDENT,
KENATHUPARAMBU, KUNATHURMEDU,
PALAKKAD, KERALA-678 013.
(ADDL.R4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED
24.5.2019 IN I.A.NO. 2/2018 IN WPC 25721/2017)
BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.DHEERAJ A.S.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 16.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) No.25721/2017
:2 :
JUDGMENT
~~~~~~~~~
Dated this the 16th day of September, 2021
The petitioner seeks to direct the respondents to
complete the survey sub-division work and to effect necessary
corrections in the Basic Tax Register changing the
classification of the petitioner's land from 'Neykey' to 'Dry land'
within a stipulated period.
2. The petitioner purchased 84.75 cents of land
comprised in Survey No.42/5 of Pottassery Amsom in
Pottassery No.1 Village of Mannarkkad Taluk, Palakkad
District, from her brother, as per Ext.P1 sale deed dated
12.08.1999. The property originally belonged to Jenm to
Mankada Kovilakam. The petitioner's mother obtained Kanam
right as per Ext.P2 registered deed in the year 1943. In the
year 1967, Jenm right was also purchased by the petitioner's
mother as per Ext.P3.
WP(C) No.25721/2017
3. The land was known as 'Filled Pullikkulam Nilam'.
The property had wide ridges on all sides on which Coconut
trees were planted. Grass was raised for cattle stock
belonging to the family. There was a small water
compartment in the land which was used for bathing cattle
stock. The said small tank gradually vanished when the stock
of the cattle depleted. As the land was used for Coconut and
Rubber plantation by the petitioner, the Village Officer
collected basic tax from the petitioner from the year
1999-2000 under the Kerala Land Tax Act.
4. Since the year 2008, the revenue authorities
refused to collect tax and the petitioner was informed that
though the land is a dry land, since it is classified as "Neykay"
in the village records, they cannot levy or accept basic tax, till
the classification of the land is corrected in the revenue
records. The petitioner thereupon submitted an application to
the Revenue Divisional Officer seeking to correct the revenue
records. The petitioner filed WP(C) No.131/2010 and this
Court directed the respondents to dispose of the case within a
WP(C) No.25721/2017
stipulated time.
5. The Village Officer submitted a report dated
25.06.2008 in favour of the petitioner. However, by Ext.P4
dated 22.07.2010, the 2nd respondent rejected the application
of the petitioner. The petitioner therefore filed an appeal
before the 1st respondent. This Court in WP(C)
No.14244/2011 directed the 1st respondent to pass final orders
on the appeal. Later, Ext.P5 order dated 10.02.2012 was
passed by the 1st respondent setting aside the order of the 2 nd
respondent and remanding the matter for fresh consideration.
6. The 2nd respondent thereupon passed Ext.P6 order
dated 23.07.2012 and directed the Revenue Authorities to
insert separate Thandaper in the name of the petitioner and to
receive tax. Accordingly, the Village Officer again started to
receive basic tax from the petitioner and Ext.P8 Possession
Certificate was also issued.
7. The Village Officer had reported that in Survey
No.42/5 there is 80.58 cents of dry land and 3 cents of pond
which is in the possession of the petitioner and the remaining
WP(C) No.25721/2017
16.42 cents of land is lying as a road. On the basis of the said
report, the 2nd respondent required the petitioner to surrender
the said 16.42 cents of land to the Government. The Sub
Collector, as per Ext.P9 dated 12.07.2013, directed the
Additional Tahsildar that the entire survey field extent of 1.00
Acre in Survey No.42/5 should be subdivided in accordance
with the report of the Village Officer.
8. After field verification, the Additional Tahsildar
reported that the total survey extent is only 91.9 cents and the
petitioner is in possession of 83.4 cents consisting of 82.7
cents of dry land and 0.7 cents of pond. The extent of road is
8.5 cents and there is a shortage of 8.1 cents of land in the
survey field. The Additional Tahsildar hence sought
clarification and the 2nd respondent directed that the 8.1
Cents should be retained in the old Survey No.42/5 itself.
9. Subsequently, the Taluk Surveyor reported that the
8.1 cents cannot be retained in old Survey No.42/5. The
Additional Tahsildar took a stand that any change in the extent
of survey field, has to be done by District Survey
WP(C) No.25721/2017
Superintendent. The District Survey Superintendent informed
the petitioner that for the purpose of subdivision, Form-7 has
to be approved by Additional Tahsildar. The Additional
Tahsildar informed the petitioner that he has not received the
Form-7. On enquiry, the petitioner learnt that the Form-7 has
to be prepared by the Head Surveyor and the Head Surveyor
has not prepared the Form-7 so far. It is under these
circumstances that the petitioner has filed this writ petition.
10. The 2nd respondent filed a counter affidavit. The 2 nd
respondent stated that the petitioner has filed an application
for fixing fair value of the land included in Survey No.42/5.
The land in Survey No.42/5 consists of 1 Acre as per records.
For fixing the fair value, the land is to be subdivided between
80.58 cents land and 03.00 cents of pond possessed by the
petitioner and 16.42 cents Panchayat Road.
11. The 3rd respondent reported that though the extent
of land Survey No. 42/5 is 1 Acre as per Village records, only
91.9 cents exists in the field and hence existing land in Survey
No.42/5 has to be reduced to 91.9 cents. The District Survey
WP(C) No.25721/2017
Superintendent was required to take necessary steps.
Fixation of actual possession of land by the petitioner is to be
determined for fixing the fair value. As there is discrepancy in
the extent of land in the Village records and on the field,
survey of entire land is necessary.
12. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned Government Pleader representing the respondents.
13. There is no serious dispute over the facts involved
in the case. The petitioner has made application to fix fair
value of the land in her possession in order to pay tax and
also to make necessary corrections in the revenue records as
regards the description of the property. The land of the
petitioner is having Thandaper registration. In Ext.P6, the Sub
Collector has held that the land can be includes in the
Thandaper account of the petitioner and land tax can be
collected. In fact pursuant to the said order, the petitioner has
been issued with Possession Certificate also.
14. To make changes in the Thandaper, it is necessary
to make sub divisions of the land in the survey number. The
WP(C) No.25721/2017
counter affidavit would indicate that the 2 nd respondent has
ordered to take necessary steps in this regard. But since the
actual extent of land in the field, in respect of the survey
number, is less than the extent of land as per the village
records, the District Survey Superintendent has to take
necessary steps in that regard.
15. In such circumstances, the writ petition is disposed
of with the following directions:
The additional 4th respondent-District Survey
Superintendent is directed to complete the process of
subdivision of the land in question and draw a sketch, within a
period of two months. On completion of the said process, the
2nd respondent shall cause opening of a new Thandaper in the
name of the petitioner in respect of the land possessed by the
petitioner, within a further period of one month.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH, JUDGE
aks/18.09.2021
WP(C) No.25721/2017
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25721/2017
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.
4051/1999 EXECUTED BY MR.RAJAGOPALAN IN
FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.1823/1943
IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER'S MOTHER.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JENM SALE DEED
NO.2883/1967 IN FAVOUR OF THE
PETITIONER'S MOTHER.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE R.D.O.,
OTTAPALAM DATED 22.7.2010.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE DISTRICT
COLLECTOR DATED 10.2.2012 IN THE APPEAL
FILED AGAINST EXHIBIT P4.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF R.D.O.
OTTAPALAM DATED 23.7.2012.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX ISSUED BY
THE VILLAGE OFFICER, POTTASSERI VILLAGE
IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER ON
10.9.2012.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE
ISSUED BY POTTASSERI VILLAGE OFFICER IN
FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER ON 24.9.2012.
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE DIRECTION ISSUED BY
THE R.D.O. OTTAPALAM TO THE ADDITIONAL
TAHSILDAR, MANNARKKAD ON 12.7.2013.
EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED
BY THE R.D.O, OTTAPALAM TO THE
ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR, MANNARKKAD, ON
6.6.2014.
ncd
