deity which were to be held with funds raised from all thavazhis. It is stated that thereafter other documents for partition were also executed by the members of the family but the deity and the property necessary for the worship of the same were left in common. It is stated that the property now been used as a temple has an extent of 3 ½ cents in resurvey No.23/13 and the petitioner's father was paying property tax in respect of the same. After the death of the petitioner's father, basic tax was being received from the petitioner which is evident from Ext.P3. Ext.P3 shows that basic tax was received in respect of 3½ cents of the property for the year 2012-2013 from the petitioner for and on behalf of the Karanavar of the thavazhi. However, it appears that for the year 2013-14, the second respondent refused to accept basic tax and the petitioner had to approach the first respondent seeking directions for receipt of basic tax. Ext.P4 order was passed by the first respondent on 03.08.2014 stating that the right to the property does not seen to have devolved on the petitioner exclusively and therefore tax can be accepted only from petitioner and others for and on behalf of Karanavur of thavazhi. Accordingly, Ext.P5 basic tax receipt was issued to the petitioner showing that basic tax is
