Kerala High Court
Thappi Abdullakutty Haji vs Olavanna Grama Panchayat, Represented ... on 9 April, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
2025:KER:31115
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 19TH CHAITHRA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 23603 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
THAPPI ABDULLAKUTTY HAJI,
AGED 62 YEARS
S/O.ABOOACKER HAJI,
THAPPIS HOUSE, PALATHINGAL (H),
PANTHEERANKAVU P.O,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673019
BY ADVS.
DILEEP VARGHESE
N.RAYNOLD FERNANDEZ
TESMY VARGHEESE
RESPONDENT/S:
1 OLAVANNA GRAMA PANCHAYAT,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY,
OLAVANNA GRAMA PANCHAYATH OFFICE,
GURUVAYURAPPAN COLLEGE P.O, MATHARA,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673014
BY ADVS.
VINOD SINGH CHERIYAN
T.M.KHALID
K.P.SUSMITHA
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
09.04.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:31115
W.P.(C). No.23603 of 2024
-:2:-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
-----------------------------------------
W.P.(C). No.23603 of 2024
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 9th day of April, 2025
JUDGMENT
Petitioner seeks for a direction to the respondent to receive
property tax due under Exhibit-P1(a) to P1(y) and also to restrain
initiating any coercive steps for realising the said amounts.
2. Petitioner is the co-owner of a multi-storeyed building
called 'Thappi Arcade'. Exhibit-P1(a) to P1(y) are recovery demand
notices dated 06.04.2024, proposing to recover property tax on building
numbers from 1353/V to 1365/V and 1366/V to 1377/V for the first and
second half of 2023. Though petitioner initially requested for some
time to clear the arrears of property tax dues atleast till 05.06.2024,
respondent initiated steps for realising the said tax. In the meantime,
petitioner issued a cheque for Rs.2,90,003/- on 20.05.2024, which was
refused to be accepted by the Secretary of the Panchayat without any
reason. It is in such circumstances that petitioner has approached this
Court through this writ petition.
3. When the case came up for consideration on 01.07.2024,
an interim direction was issued, staying the recovery proceedings, on
condition that petitioner remits an amount of R.2,90,003/- within ten
days. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the said
amount has already been deposited and the stay has been in force till
2025:KER:31115
now.
4. In the meantime, a counter affidavit has been filed by the
respondent pointing out that the property tax relates to the financial
year 2023-24, and petitioner has to pay 50% of the compounding fee
and other penal charges as per Section 210 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj
Act, 1994 (for short, 'the Act'), which was not covered by the cheque
handed over by the petitioner. It is further stated that the property tax
due for the year 2023-24 is Rs.2,70,341/- as on 31.03.2024, apart from
fine, notice fee, warrant fee and penalty totalling to Rs.1,68,979/- (as of
September, 2024). Thus, the total dues of the petitioner is stated to be
Rs.4,36,320/-, and after deducting Rs.2,90,003/- from the total dues,
petitioner has to pay a balance of Rs.1,46,317/-. According to the
respondent, writ petitioner has intentionally suppressed the penal
provisions from this Court and has approached this Court with unclean
hands. Respondent further pleads that the petitioner attempted to
escape from the liability to pay the compounding fee, fine and other
dues by handing over a cheque for an amount excluding the aforesaid
payment.
5 . I have heard Sri. Dileeep Varghese, the learned counsel for
the petitioner as well as Smt. K. P. Susmitha, the learned Standing
Counsel for the respondents, on 26.03.2025 and posted it today for
further hearing.
6. The compounding fee payable as per the Kerala Panchayat
2025:KER:31115
Raj Compounding of Offences Rules, 1996 (for short, 'the Rules')
stipulates certain specific provisions under which compounding fee can
be charged. Three types of compounding is stipulated in the Rules. The
first is the compounding by the Secretary with the permission of the
President, by payment of 50% of the fine prescribed for such offence
under the Act. The second stage is where compounding can be carried
out after obtaining permission from the court by crediting the amount
into the revenue receipts of the Panchayat, and the third category is
where the offence can be compounded without permission of the court
by payment of the amount due plus 50% of the amount. The latter two
categories arise in situations where the prosecution has already been
initiated, while the first category arises where the prosecution has not
yet been launched, but the offence can be presumed to have been
committed.
7. In the instant case, concededly, no prosecution has been
launched. Therefore, if at all there is any provision for compounding, it
can only be under Rule 3 of the Rules. As per the said Rule, the
payment made for compounding is only 50% of the fine prescribed for
the offence under the Act.
8. In this context, it is relevant to mention that the
compounding of an offence under the Rules is confined to certain
specific provisions as mentioned in the Schedule to the Rules. The
respondents have not been able to point out any specific provision
2025:KER:31115
which is attracted except for Section 240 of the Act, which deals with
failure to comply with any notice, requisition or order under Section
240(3) of the Act. Even if petitioner can be stated to have committed an
offence under Section 240(3), still, compounding fee payable can at the
most be Rs.250/-, which is 50% of the fine stipulated in the Schedule.
9. In such a view of the matter, the conduct of the respondent
in refusing to accept the tax of Rs.2,90,003/- offered by the petitioner is
totally unwarranted and without authority. It is evident that petitioner
had offered much more than what he was actually liable to pay.
10. Be that as it may, since petitioner has already paid,
pursuant to an interim order of this Court Rs.2,90,003/-, no further
amounts are liable to be paid under the impugned demand notices.
Hence, no coercive steps of any nature can be initiated against the
petitioner for recovery of property tax pursuant to Exhibit-P1(a) to
P1(y).
11. Petitioner if eligible for refund of any amount, will be
entitled to seek recourse to appropriate remedies, in accordance with
law.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
Jka/09.04.25.
2025:KER:31115
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 23603/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1(a)to (y) TRUE COPY OF REVENUE RECOVERY DEMAND
NOTICE DATED 06.04.2024 FOR RECOVERY OF
PROPERTY TAX ON NON RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
NUMBERS 1353/V TO 1365/V AND 13567/V TO
1377/V (24 NUMBERS) FOR FIRST AND SECOND
HALF OF 2023 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT TO
PETITIONER (24 NO'S)
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY PETITIONER
TO RESPONDENT DATED 08.05.2024
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT ISSUED
BY RESPONDENT FOR EXHIBIT P2
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit R1(a) COPY OF THE LETTER NO.
400997/PTAL11/GPO/2024/5664/(1) ISSUED
BY THE SECRETARY, OLAVANNA GRAMA
PANCHAYATH TO THE WRIT PETITIONER DATED
28.6.2024
