Allowed

Sumesh Babu C.B v. the Tahsildar

Kerala HC1 Nov 2022WP(C)/26299/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This concerning whether Tahsildars are bound to re-assess land tax after a Kerala Land Utilisation Order permits non-agricultural use. The Court held that officials must re-assess under Section 6A of the Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961, and directed the Tahsildar to pass orders within one month.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; Tahsildar directed to consider the petitioners' application and pass appropriate orders within one month.

Sumesh Babu C.B Vs the Tahsildar — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 10TH KARTHIKA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 26299 OF 2022

¶5

PETITIONERS:

¶6

1SUMESH BABU C.B
AGED 45 YEARS
S/O.BHAVADAS AGED 45 YEARS,
CHATHAMKULAM HOUSE, KONGAD (PO)
PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN- 678 631.

¶7

2 RAJEESH BABU C.B.

¶8

S/O.BHAVADAS AGED 42YEARS, CHATHAMKULAM HOUSE, KONGAD (PO) PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN- 678 631.

¶9

BY ADV BINOY VASUDEVAN

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 THE TAHSILDAR, (LAND RECORDS), TALUK OFFICE, CIVIL STATION, PALAKKAD, PIN-679 001.

¶12

2 THE VILLAGE OFFICER KODUMBU VILLAGE, KODUMBU P.O. PALAKKAD PIN-679 551.

¶13

SMT.VIDYA KURIAKOSE GP

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 01.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C) NO.26299 OF 2022

¶16

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

Dated this the 1^st day of November, 2022

¶19

The petitioners are before this Court aggrieved by the

¶20

omission of the 1^st respondent-Tahsildar in entertaining an application submitted by the petitioners for re-assessment of rate of Basic Tax of land and for making necessary entries in the Basic Tax Register.

¶21

The petitioners are owners of 0.0790 Hectares of property in Re-Survey No.9/4 of Block No.46 of Kodumbu Village, Palakkad Taluk in Palakkad District. The predecessorin-interest of the petitioners approached the Sub Collector invoking the provisions of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 seeking to permit to use the land for non-agricultural purposes. The Sub Collector passed Ext.P3 order under Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 permitting to use the land for non-agricultural purposes.

¶22

¶23

WP(C) NO.26299 OF 2022

¶24

The grievance of the petitioners is that even though

¶25

Ext.P3 order was passed under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 in the year 1994, the land of the petitioners is not re-assessed for fixing rate of Basic Tax and the property of the petitioners is still described as paddy land in the Revenue records. The petitioners submitted Ext.P6 application invoking Section 6(3) of the Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961 seeking to re-assess the Basic Tax and to make necessary entries in the Basic Tax Register. The Tahsildar, however, has not passed any orders on the application. Hence, the petitioners have approached this Court.

¶26

The Senior Government Pleader entered appearance on behalf of the respondents and resisted the writ petition. The Senior Government Pleader controverted all the material allegations made by the petitioners in the writ petition. It is submitted that Ext.P3 proceedings are of the year 1994. The veracity and the genuineness of Ext.P3 proceedings under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 are

¶27

¶28

WP(C) NO.26299 OF 2022

¶29

liable to be verified. The present status of the land will also have to be ascertained, before re-assessment of Basic Tax under the Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961.

¶30

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners

¶31

and the learned Government Pleader representing the respondents.

¶32

This Court has considered the issue of reassessment of land tax on the basis of the orders obtained under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 in the judgment in Mary Abraham v. State of Kerala and others [2020 (4) KLT 448]. This Court held that once enabling order is passed under Rule 6(2) of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 permitting conversion of the land, then the earlier entries in the BTR showing the land as Nilam, Paddy Land, etc. will become superfluous and redundant and the competent Revenue officials like the Tahsildar are obliged under law to make a fresh assessment of the property under Section 6A of the Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961.

¶33

¶34

WP(C) NO.26299 OF 2022

¶35

A Division Bench of this Court also considered the

¶36

issue in District Collector, Ernakulam and others v. Fr.Jose Uppani and others [2020 (4) KLT 612 ] and the Division Bench held that when an applicant has secured orders under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order prior to the cutoff date on which Section 27A was introduced to the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008, the competent Revenue officials are bound to consider the subsequent application submitted under the provisions of the Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961.

¶37

As the nature of the land of the petitioners has been permitted to be changed pursuant to passing of a statutory order under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967, the competent authority is bound to re-assess the rate of Basic Tax in respect of the land and to make necessary entries in the Basic Tax Register, if necessary, after verifying the veracity/genuineness of the permission obtained under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 produced by the

¶38

WP(C) NO.26299 OF 2022

¶39

¶40

petitioners.

¶41

The writ petition is therefore allowed. The 1^st respondentTahsildar is directed to consider Ext.P6 Form-A application submitted by the petitioners, in accordance with law, and pass appropriate orders thereon within a period of one month.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH

JUDGE

spk

WP(C) NO.26299 OF 2022

¶47

¶48

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26299/2022

¶49

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶50

Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.4230/2003 OF
S.R.O. PALAKKAD DATED 27.08.2003.
Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION
CERTIFICATE NO.19503 DATED 23.11.2011
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P3TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.D. DIS
M.7031/94 DATED 04.07.94 ISSUED BY THE
SUB COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD.
Exhibit P4TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.D.DIS,
M.7035/94 DATED 04.07.94 ISSUED BY THE
SUB COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD.
Exhibit P5TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED
12.08.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P5 ATRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD EVIDENCING
EXHIBIT P-5.
Exhibit P6TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION IN FORM
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
1ST RESPONDENT ON 04-06-2022.
Exhibit P7TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 25-06-
2018 IN W.P.(C) NO.16536 OF 2018.

¶51

RESPONDENT’S/S EXHIBITS : NIL

Sumesh Babu C.B v. the Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sumesh Babu C.B v. the Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Devanandan M.C. Vs the Board of Control for Cricket in India (Bcci), Rep. by Its Secretary

Commercial Tax Officer Vs Official Liquidator

M/S.Sudarsan Chits (I) Ltd. (in Liquidation) Vs Sri.Bhaskaran A.S

Aneesh.v Vs the Panavally Grama Panchayat

Rameshan Manthampeth Puthiyapurayil Vs the State of Kerala

Rajan George Vs State of Kerala