Allowed

Alex v. Luke, v District Collector

Kerala HC9 Nov 2022WP(C)/28534/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, Ernakulam held that despite obtaining land use permission under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967, the Tahsildar failed to update the Basic Tax Register. The court directed the third respondent to reassess the basic tax and make necessary entries within one month.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 3rd respondent to re-assess the Basic Tax of the petitioner's land under the Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961 and make necessary changes in the Basic Tax Register within one month.

Alex v Luke, Vs District Collector — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022/18TH KARTHIKA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 28534 OF 2022

¶5

PETITIONER

¶6

ALEX V LUKE,
AGED 70 YEARS
S/O. V.L.LUKE MUTHALALY VALIYAVEEDU, KADAVARAM,
KARUKONE P.O., ANCHAL,
KOLLAM 691 324.

¶7

BY ADVS.
LIJU.V.STEPHEN
INDU SUSAN JACOB
SHYNI DAS J.S.

¶8

RESPONDENTS

¶9

1 DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT, KOLLAM-691 001.

¶10

2 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KOLLAM-691 001.

¶11

3 LAND TAX AUTHORITY , TAHASILDAR (LAND RECORDS) TALUK OFFICE, PUNALUR - 691 305.

¶12

SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN SR.GP

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 09.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

¶14

W.P(C) No.28534 of 2022 ]

¶15

¶16

J U D G M E N T

¶17

Dated this the 9^th day of November, 2022

¶18

The grievance of the petitioner is that inspite of obtaining permission under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 and getting a favourable judgment from this Court in W.P(C) No.11442 of 2016, the Tahsildar is not effecting changes in the Basic Tax Register and in Revenue records.

¶19

The pleadings in the writ petition would disclose that the petitioner had approached the Revenue Divisional Officer seeking permission to use his land in Survey Nos . 539/1/1 and 539/2 of Aleyamon Village of Punalur Taluk for non-agricultural purposes, invoking the provisions of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order. By Ext.P9 order dated 10.01.2019, the Revenue Divisional Officer has granted permission to the petitioner to use the land for non-agricultural purposes.

¶20

W.P(C) No.28534 of 2022 ]

¶21

¶22

The petitioner earlier approached this Court filing W.P(C) No.11442 of 2016. In the said writ petition, this Court passed Ext.P7 judgment, the operative portion of which reads as follows:

¶23

“(i) The 2^nd respondent shall consider Ext.P4 application submitted by the petitioner for permission to convert the user of the land in terms of Clause 6(2) of the KLU Order, in the light of the findings in this judgment that the land belonging to the petitioner is not either paddy land or wetland, for the purposes of inclusion in the Land Data Bank prepared fro the region. The 2^nd respondent shall pass orders, as directed, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. To enable the 2^nd respondent to do so, I quash Ext.P6 communication of the Tahsildar.

¶24

(ii) The petitioner shall, on receipt of the order from the 2^nd respondent, produce a copy of the same along with the copy of this judgment, before the Land Tax Authorities, for causing a fresh assessment and consequential change in classification of the land in the Basic Tax Register.”

¶25

It is evident that by Ext.P7 judgment, this Court has directed the petitioner to produce a copy of the permission obtained under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order along with the copy of the judgment before the Land Tax Authorities for causing a fresh assessment and consequential change in classification of the land in the Basic Tax Register.

¶26

W.P(C) No.28534 of 2022 ]

¶27

¶28

It is the specific case of the petitioner that he has submitted Ext.P10 representation before the Tahsildar (LR) after obtaining permission under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order. Inspite of that, no steps have been taken for reassessment of basic tax of the petitioner’s land and for making consequential changes in the Basic Tax Register.

¶29

In view of Ext.P7 judgment of this Court, the Tahsildar

¶30

is bound to reassess the basic tax of the petitioner’s land and make necessary entries in the Basic Tax Register as required under law.

¶31

The writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to take immediate steps to re-assess the Basic Tax of the land of the petitioner under the Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961 and make necessary changes/entries in the Basic Tax Register. This shall be done within a period of one month.

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

N. NAGARESH, JUDGE

¶34

smm

¶35

W.P(C) No.28534 of 2022 ]

¶36

¶37

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 28534/2022

¶38

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶39

`Exhibit P1`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE` `NO.5048/2004 DATED`	`PARTITION DEED` `14.12.2004.`
`Exhibit P2`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE` `TAX FOR 1 HECTRE 63` `2015-2016.`	`RECEIPT OF THE LAND` `ARES FOR THE YEAR`
`Exhibit P2 A`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE` `TAX FOR 4.5 HECTRES` `2016.`	`RECEIPT OF THE LAND` `FOR THE YEAR 2015-`
`Exhibit P3`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE` `CERTIFICATE ISSUED` `OFFICER, ALEYAMAN V`	`POSSESSION` `BY THE VILLAGE` `ILLAGE.`
`Exhibit P4`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE` `04.02.2014 MADE BY` `THE 2ND RESPONDENT.`	`REPRESENTATION DATED` `THE PETITIONER TO`
`Exhibit P5`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE` `OFFICER DATED 12.02`	`REPORT IF VILLAGE` `.2014.`
`Exhibit P6`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE` `OF THE AGRICULTURAL` `ALONG WITH THE MAP` `FILED IN W.P. NO. 1` `HON'BLE HIGH COURT`	`MEMO DATED 16-1-2017` `OFFICER, ALAYAMON` `AND REPORT OF KSRSEC` `1442/2016 BEFORE THE` `OF KERALA.`
`Exhibit P7`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE` `31-1-2018 IN W.P.NO`	`COURT JUDGMENT DATED` `.11442/2016.`
`Exhibit P8`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE` `2019 IN CONTEMPT CA`	`JUDGMENT DATED 24-1-` `SE( C) NO.1082/2018.`
`Exhibit P9`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE` `10-1-2019 ISSUED BY`	`REVISED ORDER DATED` `THE 2ND RESPONDENT.`
`Exhibit P10`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE` `23-1-2019 MADE BY T` `3RD RESPONDENT.`	`REPRESENTATION DATED` `HE PETITIONER TO THE`
`Exhibit P11`	`TRUE COPY OF THE LA` `THE 2023 DATED 1-7-` `VILLAGE OFFICE YEAR`	`ND TAX RECEIPT FOR` `2022 ISSUED BY THE` `2022.`
`Exhibit P12`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE` `2-8-2022 MADE BY PE` `RESPONDENT.`	`REPRESENTATION DATED` `TITIONER TO THE 3RD`

Alex v. Luke, v District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alex v. Luke, v District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shaji N.R Vs Sri. A.M. Naisam

M/S. C.I. Constructions Vs Ajit Kumar IAS

Jayalakshmi.K., Vs State of Kerala

V.I. John Vs Vishnu Raj

Fathima Crushers LLP Vs the Tahsildar

Delphi Cherian Vs the Geologist