P.Vijayan vs State Of Kerala
2023 Latest Caselaw 601 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                          PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
 THURSDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 22ND POUSHA, 1944
                  WP(C) NO. 24157 OF 2013
PETITIONER/S:

         P.VIJAYAN
         S/O.PAPPU, PAZHAYIDATHU THOTTATHIL VEEDU,
         ANAKOTTOOR, NEDUVATHOOR VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA,
         KOLLAM DISTRICT.
         BY ADV SRI.B.MOHANLAL


RESPONDENT/S:

    1    STATE OF KERALA
         REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
         REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
         THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PIN-695 001.
    2    THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
         COLLECTORATE, CUTCHERY.P.O., KOLLAM-691 013.
    3    THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
         COLLECTORATE, CUTCHERY.P.O., KOLLAM-691 013.
    4    THE TAHASILDAR
         TALUK OFFICE, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM-691 506.
    5    THE VILLAGE OFFICER
         NEDUVATHOOR VILLAGE, NEELESWARAM.P.O.,
         KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM-691 506.
    6    THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER CUM TAX OFFICER
         KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM-691 506.

OTHER PRESENT:

         SRI.RENJITH.T.R, SR.GP
     THIS WRIT PETITION     (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP        FOR
ADMISSION ON 12.01.2023,    THE COURT ON THE SAME         DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C.) No.24157/2013
                                    ..2..




                    P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                  ==================
                  W.P.(C.) No. 24157 of 2013
              -----------------------------------------
            Dated this the 12th day of January, 2023


                              JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers :

(i) To call for the records leading to the petitioner's case for taking over possession under bought-in-land and its confirmation from the 4 th respondent and issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ order or direction quashing Ext.P7 and P8 and the entire Proceedings including sale of the petitioner's 42 Cents (17 Ares) of property comprised in Sy.No:577/4 Re-Sy. No:71/2 in Block No:8 and 13 Cents (5.26 Ares) of Wet Land in Sy.No:577/1-A, Re-Sy.N:307/2 in Block No:9 of Neduvathoor Village and its confirmation under the provisions of the Revenue Recovery Act and taking over under bought-in-land.

(ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the Respondents to permit the Petitioner to remit Rs.2,04,365/- under the Amnesty Scheme and to accept the market value of the property and re-convey 42 Cents (17 Ares) of property comprised in Sy.No:577/4 Re-sy.No:71/2 in Block No:8 and 13 Cents (5.26 Ares) of Wet Land in Sy.No:577/1-A, Re-Sy.No:307/2 W.P.(C.) No.24157/2013 ..3..

in Block No:9 of Neduvathoor Village to the petitioner within a stipulated time as directed by this Hon'ble Court and till then all further proceedings including assignment of the land to the third parties may be kept in abeyance.

(iii) To declare that Ext.P1 and the sale proceedings for taking over the petitioner's 42 Cents (17 Ares) of property comprised in Sy.No:577/4 Re-Sy.No:71/2 in Block No:8 and 13 Cents (5.26 Ares) of Wet Land in Sy.No:577/1-A Re- Sy.No:307/2 in Block No:9 of Neduvathoor Village under bought-in-land by the respondents is strictly in violation of the Provisions of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act and the Rules.

(iv) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 1 st Respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P6 within a stipulated time as directed by this Hon'ble Court and permit the petitioner to remit Rs.2,04,365/- under the Amnesty Scheme and to accept the market value of the property and re-convey 42 Cents (17 Ares) of property comprised in Sy.No:577/4 Re- Sy.No:71/2 in Block No:8 and 13 Cents (5.26 Ares) of Wet Land in Sy.No:577/1-A, Re-Sy.No:307/2 in Block No:9 of Neduvathoor Village to the petitioner and till then all further proceedings including assignment of the Land to the third parties may be kept in abeyance.

(v) To declare that Section 50 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act and the Circular and Government Orders concerned for re-convey of the property is ultravires and unconstitutional.

(vi) To issue such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may W.P.(C.) No.24157/2013 ..4..

deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case." [SIC]

2. The petitioner was in absolute title, possession

and enjoyment of 42 Cents (17 Ares) of property comprised

in Sy.No:577/4 in Re-Sy No:71/2 in Block No:8 and 13

Cents (5.26 Ares) of wetland in Sy. No:577/1A, Re-Sy.

No:307/2 in Block No:9 of Neduvathoor Village obtained by

virtue of settlement deed No.1354/1970 of Kottarakkara

Sub-Registry. The petitioner effected mutation of the

property and was paying tax to the Government. The

petitioner was conducting arrack shop Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 9

of Kottarakkara Excise Range for the Abkari Years 1985-86.

There was a sales tax arrears of Rs.2,04,365/- from the

petitioner in connection with the above shop and revenue

recovery proceedings were initiated to recover the above

said amount as per Ext.P1. It is the case of the petitioner

that the respondent without issuing any notice to the

petitioner and in violation of the provisions of the Revenue

Recovery Act conducted the sale of the petitioner's property

and in the absence of any bidders it was taken over in W.P.(C.) No.24157/2013 ..5..

favour of the Government as Bought-in-land and thereafter,

the same was confirmed by the 3rd respondent, The Revenue

Divisional Officer, Collectorate as per order No:P-

3436/96/K/Dis dated 29.05.1996. The petitioner filed an

application before the 4th respondent, The Tahasildar on

10.05.1998 to set aside the same and it was forwarded to

the 5th respondent, The Village Ofiicer, for report. It is the

case of the petitioner that on enquiry at the office of the 4 th

respondent, it was revealed that the file was misplaced and

lost. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted an application

before the Chief Minister of Kerala praying to grant amnesty

scheme so as to enable the petitioner to remit the amount

in order to return the property. Consequently, the 6 th

respondent, The Commercial Tax Officer cum Sales Tax

Officer, sent Ext.P2 communication and in obedience to

Ext.P2, the petitioner appeared before the 6th respondent

and later the Deputy Commissioner (Commercial Tax) as

per Ext.P3 order, directed the petitioner to file an application

before the Government. It is the case of the petitioner that W.P.(C.) No.24157/2013 ..6..

even after submitting the application as directed, the same

was not considered and the petitioner again filed an

application before the Chief Minister's Grievance Cell. Then it

was informed that the application was forwarded to the

District Collector, Kollam. The petitioner again filed an

application before the Chief Minister and he was informed as

per Ext.P5 that the representation was forwarded to the 1 st

respondent, the Secretary to the Government, Revenue

Department, for consideration. When the respondents

surveyed and demarcated the property and took steps to

assign the petitioner's property to the third parties, he

submitted representation before the 1st respondent on

15.05.2013 requesting to grant Amnesty Scheme and to

accept the amount. Ext.P6 is the representation. The 1 st

respondent considered Ext.P6 and issued Ext.P7 rejecting

the same and stating that the property of the petitioner was

taken over by the Government as bought-in-land and 19

years have elapsed. Ext.P7 is the order. In Ext.P7, it is also

stated that the property was allocated to be given to the W.P.(C.) No.24157/2013 ..7..

landless people under a scheme of the Government. Even

though the petitioner submitted an application before the 6 th

respondent through online to settle the liability, the

application was rejected by the 6th respondent and a notice

was issued to the petitioner for explanation. Ext.P8 is the

notice. Under such circumstances, the above writ petition is

filed.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

the learned Government Pleader.

4. The petitioner is mainly challenging Ext.P7

communication and the sale of his property in the revenue

recovery proceedings. The petitioner's prayer is to re-convey

the bought-in-land. The Government Pleader submitted that

as per the existing orders, bought-in-land can be re-

conveyed to the original defaulter or his undisputed legal

heirs on payment of arrears of public revenue, interest of

arrears, cost of process etc., if applied for within a period of

two years from the date of confirmation of sale. It is also

submitted that if the property is only 25 cents, it can be re- W.P.(C.) No.24157/2013 ..8..

conveyed to the landless, only if applied within 2-5 years.

Admittedly, in this case, the petitioner filed the petition for

re-conveyance before the District Collector after 11 years

from the date of confirmation of the sale. The Government

Pleader took me through the counter affidavit filed by the 4 th

respondent in which it is stated that the Government of

Kerala has launched a programme named 'Zero Landless,

2015' for giving land to landless people in Kerala. It is also

submitted that for implementing this project, the Land

Revenue Commissioner was directed to report the details of

the Government land including bought-in-land and was

ordered to assign such land to the landless people.

Accordingly, the bought-in-land comprised in Re-Sy. No:71/2

in Bl No:8 in Neduvathoor Village was assigned to landless

people of Neduvathoor Village and patta was issued to them

on 30.09.2013. The Government Pleader took me through

paragraphs 10 to 12 of the counter affidavit filed by the 4 th

respondent which is extracted hereunder :

"10. The defaulters properties were attached and auctioned W.P.(C.) No.24157/2013 ..9..

as per the provisions of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. The auction was legal and hence not objectionable. The auction sale was postponed for more than two times due to lack of sufficient bidders. In each time the notice was published as per Section 49(4) and 75 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act.

11. It is true that the land was purchased for Rs.1. Had they remitted the entire amount within two years and applied for the reconveyance of the said land within two years. After the confirmation of land could have been reconveyed to them. But instead of doing that the petitioner is arguing for the reconveyance of the land on filmsy grounds. The petitioner is a chronic defaulter of Government dues. Moreover the Government have prescribed some procedures for the disposal of land bid on behalf of Government as part of Revenue Recovery Proceedings.

12. All the revenue recovery steps taken against the petitioner by the revenue authorities are in accordance with the provisions of the Revenue Recovery Act 1968. Therefore the entire procedure is legal and just. The petition is filed with a view to challenge the welfare programme of the Government. So there is no reason to file this petition. Hence same may be dismissed."

5. From the above, it is clear that there is no

illegality in the prcedure and that the petitioner has

approached for re-conveyance of the bought-in-land only W.P.(C.) No.24157/2013 ..10..

after a decade. Under such circumstances, I am of the

considered opinion that the petitioner is not entitled any

relief in this case.

Therefore, this writ petition lacks merit and the same is

dismissed.

Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, JUDGE SKS W.P.(C.) No.24157/2013 ..11..

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24157/2013

PETITIONER EXHIBITS P1- THE TRUE COPY OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY DEMAND NOTICE NO.BA-1956/87 DATED 18.10.1995 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 49 OF THE KERALA REVENUE RECOVERY ACT THROUGH THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

P2- THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.A/46/2010 DATED 23.02.2010 ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

P3- THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.S8-

299/10 DATED 29.04.2010 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES TO THE PETITIONER.

P4- THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.D1-30341/2011 DATED 28.11.2011 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. P5- THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 12.03.2012 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

P6- THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 15.05.2013 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.70668/S2/2013/REV. DATED 20/07/2015 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.