Shaji N.T vs State Of Kerala
2023 Latest Caselaw 10222 Ker

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
 THURSDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 30TH BHADRA,
                                1945
                     WP(C) NO. 3233 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

            SHAJI N.T.
            AGED 43 YEARS, S/O KOYAKKUTTY,
            NEELADATH SHANILA MANZIL, ELOOR NORTH,
            UDYOGAMANDAL.P.O, ERNAKULAM-683501.
            BY ADVS.
            THOMAS JOHN AMBOOKEN
            SRI.B.SAJEEV KUMAR
            SMT.BLOSSOM MATHEW


RESPONDENTS:

    1       STATE OF KERALA,
            REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY,
            DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVT. SECRETARIAT,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-6950001.
    2       THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,ERNAKULAM,
            CIVIL STATION,KAKKANAD,ERNAKULAM-682030.
    3       THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,FORT KOCHI,
            REVENUE DIVISION OFFICE,ERNAKULAM-682001.
    4       THE TAHSILDAR(LR),PARAVUR TALUK,
            FIRST FLOOR,POLICE STATION ROAD,
            NORTH PARAVUR,ERNAKULAM-683513.
    5       THE VLLAGE OFFICER,
            ELOOR VILLAGE,ELOOR FERRY ROAD,
            VERAPOLI,ERNAKULAM-683501.
OTHER PRESENT:

            GP SMT.DEVISHRI R


        THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

21.09.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.3233 of 2021                2




                     BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
                   ====================
                       W.P.(C) No.3233 of 2021
                   ====================
               Dated this the 21st day of September, 2023



                               JUDGMENT

Petitioner is the owner of 2.43 Ares of land in Re-survey No.19 of

Block 10 of Eloor Village, Paravur Taluk. He alleges that the said

property was purchased by him in the year 2005 and at that time

itself a building was existing on the property. According to the

petitioner, his predecessor-in-title had obtained a development

permit on 22.02.1999 and constructed a building numbered as

II/611 B of Eloor Grama Panchayat, for which property tax and

building tax were being paid regularly, as evident from Exts.P3 and

P4. Though after the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and

Wetland Act, 2008 (for short, the Act), came into force, petitioner's

property was not included in the data bank, the entries in the Basic

Tax Register reflected the nature of the property as 'nilam'.

Petitioner filed an application as Ext.P8 on 11.01.2021, requesting

for change of classification of the property from 'nilam' to

'purayidom' in the Basic Tax Register.

2. Even after filing the application as early as on 11.01.2021,

the 4th respondent has not proceeded to consider the application

and has, instead, directed the petitioner to apply under the Act, to

obtain appropriate orders directing the change of of user.

3. Sri.Thomas John Ambooken, learned counsel for the

petitioner contended that in view of the precedents of this Court, in

Global Education Trust v. State of Kerala [2020 (6) KLT 738] as

well as the decision in State of Kerala and others v. Binu

Mathew Chacko & Others [2020 (6) KHC 717], the application

filed by the petitioner is required to be considered and appropriate

changes effected, without insisting for any application under

Sec.27A of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act,

2008.

4. I have heard Smt.R.Devishri, learned Government Pleader.

5. A perusal of Ext.P2 reveals that a development permit was

granted for developing the property in Survey No.229/1B of Eloor

Village as early as on 22.02.1999. Re-Survey No.19 of Block No.10

of Eloor Village is stated to be the revised survey number of the

aforementioned property. A perusal of Exts.P3 and P4 reveals that

petitioner had even paid tax for building No.II/611 B of Eloor Grama

Panchayat.

6. If the petitioner's property is situated in the land which was

granted Ext.P2 development permit and a building was constructed

prior to the coming into force of the Act, as evidenced by Ext.P3,

certainly an application under the Act is not required. This Court

had, in Global Education Trust v. State of Kerala [2020 (6) KLT

738], held that construction undertaken without an order under the

KLU cannot be treated as illegal and that the requirement of Section

27A of the Act can only be in respect of a land which had not been

utilised legally prior to incorporation of the said provision. In view

of the above binding decision petitioner's application under the

Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961, has to be independently considered

without reference to the Act.

7. Hence, there will be a direction to 4th respondent to consider

petitioner's application, produced as Exts.P8, 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 Skk//26.09.2023

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3233/2021

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.1598/2005 OF ALANGAD SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT ISSUED TO HAMEED.P.M BY GCDA DATED 22.02.1999 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF BUILDING TAX RECEIPT DATED 10.04.2007 ISSUED BY ELOOR PANCHAYATH EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF BUILDING TAX RECEIPT DATED 14.12.2020 ISSUED BY ELOOR MUNICIPALITY EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE DATED 04.01.2021 ISSUED BY ELOOR MUNICIPALITY EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF BASIC TAX REGISTER DATED 01.01.2021 EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 01.04.2019 EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 6A OF THE KERALA LAND TAX ACT DATED 11.01.2021 EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD DATED 15.01.2021.

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:-    NIL