HIGH COURT OF KERALA
ANU SIVARAMAN, J
RAJEESH BABU C.B. – Appellant
Versus
THE TAHSILDAR (LAND RECORDS) – Respondent
WP(C)/29836/2021
Land - Revenue Records - Kerala Land Tax Act - KLU Order - Section 6A
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner claimed ownership of land recorded as 'nilam' but sought status change for its use, having obtained prior permissions under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, and filed an application under the Kerala Land Tax Act for consideration.
Finding of the Court:
The court directed that the application submitted by the petitioner be considered as per the law, referencing prior judgments that support the petitioner's claims for correction of land classification in the revenue records.
Issues: Whether the petitioner’s application seeking change of land classification from 'nilam' to 'garden land' should be considered by the relevant authority under the Kerala Land Tax Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the administrative duty to consider lands' reassessment and classification properly, as supported by judicial precedents regarding land utilization, thereby necessitating a response to the application.
Final Decision: The court ordered the authority to consider the application and correct the land records, completing the proceedings within two months.
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 21 s t day of December, 2021 The petitioner claims to be the owner in possession of a land having an extent of 0.0607 hectares in Re-survey No.9/2 of Kodumbu Village in Palakkad Taluk of Palakkad District. It is submitted that though the property is a dry land, it has been recorded as 'nilam' in the revenue records and is not included in the data bank. It is submitted that after the purchase of the property, the petitioner had approached the Revenue Divisional Officer for permission to use the property for other purposes. By Exts.P3 and P4 proceedings, the petitioner had obtained orders under Clause 6(2) of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order (for short, 'the KLU Order'). The petitioner has, thereafter, submitted Ext.P6 application before the 1st respondent and seeks a consideration of the same in terms of Section 6A of the Kerala Land Tax Act .
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue stands squarely covered by the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in District Collector, Ernakulam and others v. Fr.Jose Uppani and others [ 2020 (4) KLT 612 ]. It is submitted that the 1st respondent is duty bound to consider Ext.P6 application exercising powers under Section 6A of the Kerala Land Tax Act . It is submitted that necessary additional entries will have to be made in the Basic Tax Register maintained in terms of Rule 4 of the Kerala Land Tax Rules to show the change in nature of the land and a reassessment will have to be effected in respect of the properties in question.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the entry to be made in the revenue records should not be as 'converted land', since there is no such classification of land as provided in the relevant enactments and that in view of the conversion duly carried out by the petitioner, the land should be shown as 'garden land/dry land/purayidom' in the altered Basic Tax Register.
4. Having heard the learned Government Pleader also, I am of the opinion that the application submitted by the petitioner is liable to be considered in accordance with law, taking note of the judgments of this Court inDistrict Collector, Ernakulam and others v. Fr.Jose Uppani and others [ 2020 (4) KLT 612 ] and in Iype Varghese v. Revenue Divisional Officer, Idukki and others [ 2020 (5) KLT 403 ].
In the above view of the matter, there will be a direction to the 1st respondent to take up, consider Ext.P6 application preferred by the petitioner, in the light of the judgments referred to above and pass appropriate orders, after considering all relevant aspects of the matter including the nature and identity of the property and the fact that whether the conversion had been carried out pursuant to Exts.P3 and P4 orders. If the facts stated are found to be correct and if the application is liable to be considered, then, the appropriate steps shall be taken for correction of the entry/alteration of the revenue records by entering the property as garden land/dry land/purayidom. The entire proceedings shall be completed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
This writ petition is ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :-
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT No.7674/2007 OF S.R.O.
PALAKKAD.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED
15-04-2013 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER VIDE REFERENCE No.J/SR/3832/
2007 DATED 13-03-2008.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PALAKKAD VIDE ORDER No.J-
2260/2008-K.Dis DATED 08-05-2008.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 10-
08-2020.
EXHIBIT P5(a) TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL EVIDENCING SUBMISSION OF EXHIBIT P5 REQUEST.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION IN FORM A SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON
10-09-2021.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.