The prescribed fee payable under Sec.27A(1) is the notified fair value of the subject property covered by the application, and it should be strictly based on the fair value as on the date of submission of the application.

JUDGMENT :

S. Manikumar, J.

Being aggrieved by the judgment in W.P.(C) No.13321 of 2020 dated 7th July, 2020 and a common judgment dated 29th June, 2020 in W.P.(C) Nos.12744 & 12721 of 2020, instant appeals are filed. The issues raised in the instant appeals are common in nature, and therefore, we propose to pass a common judgment.

2. The followings were the reliefs sought for in the writ petitions:

W.P.(C) No.13321 of 2020

(i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the records leading to Ext.P4 and quash the same.

(ii) Declare that the 1st respondent has no right or authority to demand the increased fair value of a neighbouring land of the petitioner, as per section 27A(3) of Act 29 of 2018.

(iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 1st respondent to issue final orders as per section 27 A(2) of Act 29 of 2018 and grant permission to utilize of 14.04 Ares (34.69 cents) of land comprised in Re.Sy Nos.128/15-4, 128/28-2, in Block No.25 of Perumbayikkadu Village, Kottayam Taluk for other purposes including construction of building after accepting the fees on the basis of the fair value of petitioner's land prevailing at the time of submission of Ext.P2 application.

(iv) Grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case including the cost of this Writ petition.

W.P.(C) No. 12721 of 2020

(i) issue a writ of certiorari or any appropriate or any appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the records leading to Ext.P4 Notice and quash the same.

(ii) Declare that the 1st respondent has no right or authority to demand the increased Fair Value of a neighbouring land of the petitioner, after accepting the fees as per section 27A(3) of Act 29 of 2018.

(iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 1st respondent to issue final orders as per section 27A(2) of Act 29 of 2018 and grant permission to utilize 10.15 Ares(25.08 cents) of land comprised in Re.Sy.Nos.128/27-2, 128/28-1, 128/27-1, 128/15-3 and 128/28-1-1-1 in block No.25 of Perumbayikkadu Village Kottayam Taluk, for other purposes including construction of building after accepting the fees remitted vide Ext.P3 Chalan, and

(iv) grant such other reliefs as this Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of this case including the cost of this Writ Petition.

W.P.(C) No. 12744 of 2020

(i) “issue a writ of certiorari or any appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the records leading to Ext.P5 Notice and quash the same.

(ii) Declare that the 1st respondent has no right or authority to demand the increased Fair Value of a neighbouring land of the petitioner, after accepting the fees as per section 27A(3) of Act 29 of 2018.

(iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 1st respondent to issue final orders as per section 27A(2) of Act 29 of 2018 and grant permission to utilize 3.86 Ares (9.538 cents) of land comprised in Re-Sy No.128/28-1-1 in block No.25 of Perumbayikkadu Village Kottayam Taluk, for other purposes including construction of building after accepting the fees remitted vide Ext.P4 Chalan receipt, and

(iv) grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of this case including the cost of this Writ Petition.”

3. After considering the rival submissions, in W.P.(C) Nos.12744 & 12721 of 2020, writ court ordered thus :

“10. In that view of the matter, it is ordered and declared that the matter would require serious reconsideration at the hands of the 1st respondent-RDO. The impugned Ext.P4 in W.P.(C.) No.12721/2020 and the impugned Ext.P5 order in W.P.(C.) No.12744/2020 will stand set aside and quashed and the matter will stand remitted to the 1st respondent-RDO for consideration of the limited issue as to the correctness of the factual aspects regarding the notified fair value as stated in Ext.P2 report of the responden