Revenue Authorities possess the power to amend the Basic Tax Register based on prior survey results without requiring compliance with Section 27A of the Act.

JUDGMENT :

A. Muhamed Mustaque, J.

These writ appeals raise the same question that arise from the common judgment of the learned Single Judge. The question considered by the learned Single Judge was whether the correction of the Basic Tax Register (BTR) from nilam to purayidam, based on re-survey conducted prior to the enactment of Act 28 of 2008, requires compliance with the process of Section 27A of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 ('the Act' in short). This question was answered in favour of the writ petitioner, who had challenged the action of the Revenue Authorities. There is no dispute to the fact that all these lands were originally classified as nilam in the settlement register. Thereafter, based on a re-survey conducted prior to the enactment of Act 28 of 2008, land involved in these cases were classified as purayidam in the re-survey BTR. The nature of the land as on the date of the promulgation of Act 28 of 2008 is not in doubt; it is neither paddy land nor wetland. The change in description of the land from nilam in the settlement register to purayidam in the re-survey BTR form the subject of the challenge.

2. A learned Single Judge of this Court, in Indira v. Sub Collector ; [ 2020 (4) KLT 635 ] took the view that the BTR, as envisaged in Rule 4 of Kerala Land Tax Rules, 1976, is a vital statutory document, and that the entries therein cannot be simply ignored by the competent Revenue Authority to proceed adversely as against the parties merely on the ground that the settlement register describes the property as nilam or wetland.

3. The learned Government Pleader submits that Rule 2(e) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules, 2008 ('the Rules' in short) was not adverted to in Indira's case(supra) and, therefore, the judgment in Indira's case(supra) cannot be relied on. It is appropriate to refer to Rule 2(e) of the Rules which reads as follows;

“2(e) The term "Basic Tax Register" includes the Settlement Register as well as the Supplementary Basic Tax Register.”

These Rules came into force only with effect from 15.12.2018 and can have no impact on the present cases. Admittedly, through a process of re-survey, the land has been classified as purayidam in the BTR much before the Rules came into effect.

4. The Rules were never intended to unsettle any entry in the BTR made prior to their formulation in 2018. Further, we note that there is no substantive provision in the parent Act governing this aspect, and the extent to which the Rules can hold the field in addressing the issue is left open. The point for consideration is that, in the event of inconsistency between the settlement register and the Basic Tax Register, it is the BTR that has to be followed by the Revenue Authorities or not. Admittedly, in all these cases, the land is classified as nilam in the settlement register, whereas in the BTR it is classified as purayidam.

5. The learned Single Judge, in the impugned judgment, referred to the distinguishing features of the settlement register and the BTR. It is to be noted that the change effected in the BTR in all these cases was the result of a conscious act following the re-survey. This indicates that the Revenue Authorities intended to effect a change of classification to purayidam through a process undertaken by the survey authorities. It is not a mere descriptive change consequent upon a re-survey, but an acknowledgment of the nature of the land by declaring it as purayidam. The fact that the settlement register continues to describe the land as nilam is not decisive, since the Revenue Authorities had consciously taken a decision to record it as purayidam in the BTR. Though the State has pleaded in its counter that it is an erroneous entry, we are unable to accept this argument at the outset, for the simple reason that, acting on this entry, a petroleum outlet has been established in one of the writ appeals, and all related documents have described the land as purayidam