Monday, 04, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Paulson vs State Of Kerala
2023 Latest Caselaw 10557 Ker

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 10557 Ker
Judgement Date : 16 October, 2023

Kerala High Court
Paulson vs State Of Kerala on 16 October, 2023
              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
 MONDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 24TH ASWINA, 1945
                     WP(C) NO. 26884 OF 2023


PETITIONER:

            PAULSON
            AGED 65 YEARS
            S/O.ANTONY,
            CHAKKALAKKAL HOUSE, KALLETTUMKARA P.O.,
            THAZHEKKAD, THRISSUR, PIN - 680683

            BY ADV M.SREEKUMAR


RESPONDENTS:

    1       STATE OF KERALA
            REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
             REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001

    2       REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
            OFFICE OF THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
            IRINJALAKKUDA NORTH P.O.,
            IRINJALAKKUDA, PIN - 680125

            BY ADV.
            K.AMMINIKUTTY, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER
     THIS     WRIT   PETITION    (CIVIL)     HAVING    COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION    ON   16.10.2023,     THE     COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C).No.26884 of 2023
                                   -:2:-




                     BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
                    --------------------------------------
                      W.P.(C).No.26884 of 2023
                    --------------------------------------
                Dated this the 16th day of October, 2023


                              JUDGMENT

Petitioner claims to be the owner of an extent of 7.69 Ares of

property in Survey No.484/1-2 of Block No.25 of Kallettumkara

Village, Chalakudy Taluk, Thrissur District. The aforesaid property

has not been included in the data bank. However, in the Basic Tax

Register, the land is classified as 'Nilam'. The property is thus an

unnotified land. Petitioner applied in Form 6 under Section 27A of

the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 (for

short, 'the Act') to change the nature of unnotified land. By a

communication dated 01.06.2023, the 2nd respondent directed the

petitioner to pay a conversion fee under Section 27A(3)of the Act.

2. Sri. M.Sreekumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner,

contended that no conversion fee is payable for an extent of land

less than 25 cents and therefore, the demand is without any basis.

3. Smt. K.Amminikutty, the learned Senior Government

Pleader, on the other hand, submitted that the prior title deeds as

well as that of the petitioner's title deed are required to be verified, W.P.(C).No.26884 of 2023

and if the extent is above 25 cents, the conversion fee is liable to be

paid.

4. In the decision in Sumesh U. v. Revenue Divisional

Officer Palakkad [2023 (3) KHC 431], this Court has already

observed that a conversion fee is not payable for an extent of land

less than 25 cents under Section 27A of the Act. Further, in the

decision in Baby v. District Collector [2021 (6) KLT 316], the

Circular No.169/2022 was held to be unconstitutional. Thus, based

on the legal principles laid down in the above decisions, an applicant

under Section 27A of the Act is not liable to pay any conversion fee

to the extent of 25 cents.

5. In the circumstances, petitioner's title deed, including those

of his predecessor-in-title, is to be verified to assess whether any of

them possessed an extent of land above 25 cents as on 30-12-2017.

If, on such verification, the extent is less than 25 cents, then no fee

shall be payable. Ext.P4 notice has been issued without bearing in

mind the above legal principles and hence it is liable to be set aside.

6. Accordingly, I set aside Ext.P4 and direct the 2nd

respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the

petitioner's application under Form 6 of the Rules, bearing in mind

the principles laid down in the decision in Baby's case (supra) and W.P.(C).No.26884 of 2023

Sumesh's case (supra), as expeditiously as possible, at any rate,

within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of

this judgment.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE

Jka/16.10.23.

W.P.(C).No.26884 of 2023

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26884/2023

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PARTITION DEED NO.1951/1/91 OF SUB REGISTRY OFFICE, KALLETTUMKARA DATED 24.07.1991.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 17.09.2021.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 26.03.2022.

Exhibit P4                 TRUE   COPY  OF   THE  NOTICE  DATED
                           01.06.2023 BEARING FILE NO.3438/2023
                           ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE
                           PETITIONER.
 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter