IMPORTANT POINTS:
• If an order is passed by the authority under the Kerala Land Utilization Order or Act 28 of 2008 changing the description of the land, that cannot lead to a situation where Section 18 is attracted. On the other hand, such change of the description of the land would render the assessments already made under Section 6A of the Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961 redundant and instead what is called for is a fresh assessment in accordance with the said Act
• Statutory enquiry to ascertain whether the land is a "Paddy Land" or "Wetland" and conversion of the land for residential purpose or for any public purpose is governed by KLU Order or the Kerala Wetland Act, 2008 for conversion of the land from "Nilam" (Wetland) to 'Purayidam' (Dry Land). The concerned authorities constituted under KLU Order or Kerala Wetland Act 2008 are the competent authority. Nature of the land cannot be changed or converted by directing changes in the Basic Tax Register which is maintained only for the purpose of land tax. The rectification envisaged by Section 18 of Kerala Land Tax Act can only be in respect of arithmetical or clerical error, that too in the order of determining the tax due.

JUDGMENT :

SHAJI P. CHALY, J.

This appeal is filed by the Tahsiladar and the Village Officer of Thodupuzha Taluk and Village respectively of Idukki District seeking to set aside the judgment rendered by the learned single Judge quashing Ext.P7 order passed by the Tahsildar dated 01.10.2019 declining the request made by the writ petitioner to make necessary additional entries in the revenue records consequent, to the order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer permitting the writ petitioner for utilisation of the property in question for other purposes other than paddy cultivation, under clause 6(2) of the land Utilisation Order, 1967.

2. Material facts for the disposal of the writ appeal are as follows:

Writ petitioner is the owner in possession of 19.23 Ares of paddy land situated in survey No. 151/1A-2 of Thodupuzha Village, Thodupuzha Taluk. According to the writ petitioner, though the property was not a paddy field, it was remaining in the village records as 'nilam'. Therefore by virtue of the enabling provision contained under clause 6(2) of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967, writ petitioner sought for permission for conversion of paddy filed for other purposes. Since there was delay in disposing of the application by the Revenue Divisional Officer, the writ petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No. 13481 of 2017 and in accordance with Ext.P1 judgment dated 09.11.2017, the Revenue Divisional Officer was directed to dispose of the application within a time frame and also permitted the writ petitioner to move the statutory authority under the Kerala Land Tax Act for fresh assessment of the land as garden land. Accordingly, Revenue Divisional Officer, Idukki considered the application submitted by the writ petitioner and has passed Ext.P2 order dated 05.06.2018 permitting him to utilise the property for other purposes other than paddy cultivation. Accordingly, the writ petitioner approached the Municipality and secured Ext.P3 building permit dated 26.10.2018 for constructing a commercial building having an area of 997.61 sq. meters. On the basis of Ext.P1 judgment and Ext.P2 order dated 05.06.2018, necessary entries were made in the thandaper register in the Village Office adding the description of the property as property for other purposes as permitted under Section 6(2) of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967. Thereafter, the writ petitioner paid tax. However, in the tax receipt, the property is shown as 'nilam'. Thereupon, the writ petitioner submitted Ext.P6 application dated 22.08.2019 to rectify the mistake in the Land Tax Register, which was declined as per Ext.P7 order for the reason that consequent to the introduction of Section 27A of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008 ('Act, 2008' for short) on and with effect from 30.12.2017, the writ petitioner has to approach the Revenue Divisional Officer and secure orders in accordance with the amended provision.

3. Learned single Judge, after taking into account the factual and legal situations, has passed the impugned judgment quashing Ext.P7 and directed the Tahsildar to consider Ext.P6 application construing it as an application under Section 6A of the Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961 and to issue necessary orders thereon, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the writ petitioner as expeditiously as possible, but not later than one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.

4. We have heard learned Senior Government Pleader, Sri. Aravinda Kumar Babu T.K and learned counsel appearing for the respondent i.e., the writ petitioner, Sri. T.P. Pradeep and perused the pleadings and documents on record.

5. The prime contention advanced by the learned Senior Government Pleader is relying upon Section 27A of Act, 2008, which was introduced into the Act, 2008 on and with effect from 30.12.2017. In fact, Act, 2008 was brought into force with an intention to conserve the paddy land and wet land and to restrict the convers