Allowed

Sameer Rep. by His Power of Attorney Holder Moideen v. District Collector, Malappuram

Kerala HC12 Feb 2015WP(C)/4479/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court set aside orders rejecting a petition for mutation of property, payment of tax, and issue of possession certificate. Court held that violation of land utilization order cannot be a ground to deny mutation under registry rules and held that the impugned orders could not condition mutational acceptance on restoration of land.

What did the court decide?

Exhibits P5 and P6 set aside; petitioner directed to have application reconsidered for mutation, tax acceptance, and possession certificate within one month.

Sameer Rep. by His Power of Attorney Holder Moideen Vs… — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/23RD MAGHA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 4479 of 2015 (H)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SAMEER, AGED 35, S/O. UMMAR, RESIDING AT THOTTI VALAPPIL HOUSE, P.O.KANMANAM, VARANAKKARA DESOM, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPURAM DISTRICT - 676 551 REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MR.MOIDEEN, AGED 61, S/O. KUNHIMOIDEENKUTTY, RESIDING AT CHATHANCHERI HOUSE, VAIROMKODE P.O., THIRUNAVAYA, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.THIYYANNOOR RAMAKRISHNAN

¶9

SRI.ARUN KUMAR.P SMT.AMBIKA RADHAKRISHNAN

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676 001.

¶12

2. VILLAGE OFFICER,

¶13

VALAVANNUR VILLAGE OFFICE,

¶14

TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676 551.

¶15

3. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,

¶16

TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676 551.

¶17

4. THAHSILDAR, TIRUR TALUK,

¶18

MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676 551.

¶19

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.JOSEPH GEORGE

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

mbr/

¶22

WP(C).No. 4479 of 2015 (H)

¶23

APPENDIX

¶24

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶25

P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE POWR OF ATTORNEY EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER IN FAVOUR OF HIS AGENT MR.MOIDEEN. P2TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT EVIDENCING PAYMENT OF FEES FOR THE APPLICATION TO EFFECT MUTATION OF PETITIONER'S NAME. P2(A) - ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT. P2. P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION MADE BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DISTRICT COLLECTOR. P3(A) - ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT. P3. P4TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 27.9.2014 TO THE PETITIONER. P4(A) - ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT. P4.

¶26

P5 - TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 24.11.2014 BEARING NO. 2393/2014 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT VILLAGE OFFICER TO THE PETITIONER REJECTING REQUEST FOR PAYMENT OF LAND TAX. P5(A) - ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT P5.

¶27

P6 - TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 05.12.2014 BEARING NO. 256/14 REJECTING ISSUANCE OF POSSESSION CERTIFICATE.

¶28

P6(A) - ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT. P6.

¶29

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: - NIL

/TRUE COPY

P.A. TO JUDGE

mbr/

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶34

W.P.(C) No.4479 of 2015

¶35

Dated this the 12^th day of February, 2015

¶36

JUDGMENT

¶37

The petitioner is the power of attorney holder of the owner of the property forming the subject matter of the application preferred for effecting mutation before the 2^nd respondent. After considering the claim put up by the petitioner, the request was turned down as per Ext.P5 dated 24.11.2014 and also vide Ext.P6 dated 05.12.2014, with regard to the mutation to be effected, tax to be remitted and issuance of Possession Certificate, stating that the request could be acceded to, only subject to the restoration of the land under the Kerala Land Utilisation order.

¶38

According to the 2^nd respondent/Village Officer, the nature of the land was changed in contravention of the provisions of Kerala Land Utilisation order and hence Exts.P5 and P6 were issued. This made the petitioner to approach this Court challenging the said proceedings and for appropriate reliefs.

¶39

Heard the learned Government Pleader appearing for the

¶40

W.P.(C) No.4479 of 2015

¶41

¶42

respondents as well.

¶43

Unlike the provisions of Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008, no power is vested with the authorities like the respondents to order restoration of land, if at all any violation of Kerala Land Utilisation order is effected. Whether the violation was effected at the hands of the petitioner or the predecessor-in-title is not clear and as such, if at all violation is there, it is open for the concerned respondent to take an appropriate remedial action, if any, in accordance with law. This cannot be a ground to deny the mutation to be effected in terms of the Transfer of Registry Rules and to accept the tax in terms of the Kerala Land Tax Act.

¶44

In the said circumstances, Exts.P5&P6 are set aside. There will be a direction to the 1^st respondent to reconsider the application preferred by the petitioner in terms of the above provisions of law and to effect mutation, accept the tax as and when the same is tendered and also issue Possession Certificate, subject to satisfaction of other requirements, in accordance with law. This shall be done at the earliest, at any rate, within 'one

¶45

W.P.(C) No.4479 of 2015

¶46

¶47

month' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶48

The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of the writ petition, before the first respondent, for further steps.

¶49

The writ petition is disposed of.

¶50

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON,

¶51