Allowed

Treasan P S v. Revenue Divisional Officer

Kerala HC3 Nov 2023WP(C)/19400/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition filed by a landowner seeking reassessment of land tax and corrections in basic tax records. The Court directed the 2nd respondent to consider the applications and finalize proceedings within two months, allowing the petitioner to argue on the genuineness of a KLU order and data bank inclusion.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 2nd respondent to consider and finalize the petitioner's applications for reassessment of land tax and correction in BTR within two months.

Treasan P S Vs Revenue Divisional Officer — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 3^RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 / 12TH KARTHIKA, 1945

¶5

WP(C) NO. 19400 OF 2023

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

TREASAN P S,AGED 51 YEARS,S/O SREEDHARAN, POOKKODAN HOUSE, CHENGALOOR PO, CHENGALOOR VILLAGE, DESOM, THRISSUR DT, PIN - 680312 BY ADVS. SHOBY K.FRANCIS AGI SHOBY

¶8

RESPONDENT:

¶9

1 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,OFFICE OF THE RDO, COLLECTORATE, AYYANTHOLE PO, THRISSUR, PIN - 680003

¶10

2 TAHSILDAR/ADDL.TAHSILDAR[LAND RECORDS],THRISSUR TALUK, TALUK OFFICE, CHEMBUKKAVU PO, THRISSUR, PIN - 680020

¶11

3 VILLAGE OFFICER,AYYANTHOLE VILLAGE, AYYANTHOLE PO, THRISSUR-, PIN - 680003

¶12

4 LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE [LLMC]-(WITHIN THE LOCAL LIMITS OF THRISSUR CORPORATION),REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER, AGRICULTURAL FIELD OFFICER, CHEMBUKKAVU, THRISSUR, PIN - 680020

¶13

5 AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,KRISHI BHAVAN , AYYANTHOLE PO, THRISSUR, PIN - 680003

¶14

6 STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001

¶15

OTHER PRESENT:

¶16

GP - SYAMANTHAK B.S.

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03.11.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

VIJU ABRAHAM,J

¶19

W.P.(C).No.19400 of 2023

¶20

Dated this the 3^rd day of November, 2023

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a

¶23

direction to the 2^nd respondent to consider and

¶24

pass orders on Exts.P3 and P4 applications for re-

¶25

assessment of the Land Tax and for making

¶26

necessary additional entries in the BTR, taking into account the KLU order produced by the petitioner.

¶27

The petitioner is the owner and in

¶28

possession of an extent of 4.65 Ares (11.50 cents) of land comprised in Survey No.679/1 of Ayyanthole

¶29

Village in Thrissur Taluk in Thrissur District. Petitioner purchased the property from one Fathima

¶30

Beevi and contend that the property was part of Priyadharsini Housing Co-Operative Society which

¶31

owned an extent of 29 Acres and 88.50 cents of land which has divided in 300 plots for allotment

¶32

to the members for the purpose of house

¶33

W.P.(C).No.19400 of 2023 3

¶34

construction. Since the property is categorised as

¶35

nilam in the BTR and in the revenue records, the

¶36

said Society applied for KLU order as per the

¶37

application dated 18.11.1993 and the said

¶38

application has been allowed as per Order No.D113951/92 dated 7.2.1994 by the 1^st respondent. Petitioner purchased Plot Nos.249 and 250, which originally belonged to the said Society. Petitioner contend that the property has not been included in Ext.P2 data bank also. It is in the said circumstance, petitioner preferred Ext.P3 application in Form A and also submitted Ext.P4

¶39

written representation to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3.

¶40

Petitioner relies on the judgments in

¶41

Revenue Divisional Officer v. Poothotta Resorts

¶42

(2023 (1) KHC 34(DB) and also Fr. Jose Uppani and Others v. District Collector (2020 (3) KHC 411)

¶43

and Sealand Builders Pvt. Ltd.,(M/s) v. Revenue Divisional Officer (2020 (4) KHC 764) and also Kizhakkambalam Grama Panchayath v. Mariyamma (2015 (2) KLT 516), Fort Kochi and Others . Petitioner

¶44

W.P.(C).No.19400 of 2023 4

¶45

has approached this Court aggrieved by the

¶46

inordinate delay in finalyising the proceedings on Exts.P3 and P4 applications.

¶47

Heard the learned Government Pleader also.

¶48

The learned Government Pleader upon

¶49

instructions submitted that the property

¶50

comprised in Survey No.707/1 having an extent of

¶51

1.1448 hectors has been included in the data bank

¶52

and that application has been submitted by the petitioner to remove the same from the data bank.

¶53

The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the property has already been removed from the data bank. In case the property

¶54

is covered by valid KLU order and that it is not

¶55

included in the data bank, there can be no impediment in considering Ext.P3 application in accordance with law.

¶56

Therefore, the above writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 2^nd respondent to take up Exts.P3 and P4 and finalise the same within an

¶57

outer limit of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The 2^nd respondent will

¶58

W.P.(C).No.19400 of 2023 5

¶59

be free to verify whether the property has in fact

¶60

been included in the data bank, while taking a

¶61

decision as directed above and also the genuinenity of the KLU order bearing No.D113951/92 dated 7.2.1994. Petitioner will be free

¶62

to produce notes of argument incorporating all the

¶63

contentions and judgment relied on by the

¶64

petitioner in support of his claim. The 2^nd respondent while considering the application as directed above, shall advert to the contention taken by the petitioner in the said argument notes also.

¶65

Sd/-

¶66

VIJU ABRAHAM, JUDGE

¶67

¶68

W.P.(C).No.19400 of 2023 6

¶69

¶70

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶71

Exhibit P-1	A TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT DATED 4-7-2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
Exhibit P-2	A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE DATA BANK DATED NIL WITH RESPECT TO THE AYYANTHOLE VILLAGE
Exhibit P-3	A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 28-5-2022 IN FORM NO. A SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO CARRY OUT CHANGES IN THE BTR AND FOR REASSESSMENT OF BASIC TAX WITH FILE NO. B1-406059/22C
Exhibit P-4	A TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN REQUEST DATED 28-5-2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE REASSESSMENT OF THE BASIC TAX

Treasan P S v. Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Treasan P S v. Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Official Liquidator,M/S.Nagoor Khani Raw Vs Sri.S.v.Anilkumar

Shaji P.P Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

C.Santhosh(Corrected as C.Satheesan) and Another Vs State of Kerala

Dany Thomas.E, Vs * the Village Officer, *

M. Velayudhan, Vs the State of Kerala

Ravi Vs State of Kerala