IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 14^TH DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 23RD PHALGUNA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 7319 OF 2022 PETITIONER:

K.C.LALAN, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O. CHAKRAPANI, VISHNU BHAVAN, CHENGANDA, CMC -7, VARANADU P.O, CHERTHALA 688 539 BY ADVS.

J.OM PRAKASH C.X.ANTONY BENEDICT EMMANUAL SANJU POORNIMA S.NAIR RESPONDENTS:

1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR ALAPPUZHA 688 001

2 THE THAHSILDAR,(LAND RECORDS)

CHERTHALA P.O, 688 524

3 THE TALUK SURVEYOR, TALUK OFFICE, CHERTHALA 688 524

4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOKOTHAMANGALAM VILLAGE, KOKOTHAMANGALAM P.O, CHERTHALA 688 543

5 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF RESURVEY ALAPPUZHA 688 001

6 ANURUDHAN, AGED 57 YEARS S/O.CHAKARAPANI, MADATHIL PUTHENPURAYIL HOUSE, CHENGANDA, CMC-7, VARANADU P.O, CHERTHALA 688 539 SMT.K.AMMINIKUTTY SR.G.P.

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

The petitioner alleges that on account of an error in the Resurvey Records, his property has been unfairly and illegally included in the extent which is shown to be owned by the sixth respondent. The petitioner asserts that his property is distinct from that owned by the sixth respondent and therefore, that the competent Authority was obligated to allow him to remit land tax thereon, which has now been refused merely for the afore reason. He says that he has, therefore, preferred Ext.P4 application before the District Collector and prays that the same be directed to be taken up and disposed of without any further delay.

2. In response to the afore submissions of Sri.Emmanual Sanju - learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Senior Government Pleader, Smt.K.Amminikutty, submitted that, as is evident from the pleadings on record itself, the difficulty faced by the petitioner is on account of certain alleged errors in the Resurvey records. She submitted that since the petitioner has now sought for correction of the same and since Ext.P4 is to be decided only by the second respondent -Tahsildar, the District Collector has forwarded it to the said Authority; adding that necessary action thereon will be completed, including by allotting a subdivision number to the property in question, without any avoidable delay. She explained that it is only after the subdivision number is so alloted by the second respondent – Tahsildar, can the petitioner seek to pay land tax on the property in question.

3. I must say that I find substantial force in the submissions of the learned Senior Government Pleader and am, therefore, of the view that the second respondent – Tahsildar, must complete proceedings based on Ext.P4 request, after conducting necessary site inspection and physical enquiries and after hearing the petitioner; thus culminating in an appropriate order thereon, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Needless to say, on the afore enquiry being completed, the Tahsildar shall communicate the resultant order to the petitioner; based on which, he will be at liberty to approach the fourth respondent - Village Officer, along with the amounts required for the remittance of land tax, which shall be accepted without any avoidable delay thereafter.

Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE stu APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7319/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED

06.04.1992.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED

11.11.2021.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LOCATION SKETCH PREPARED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 12.04.2016.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR DATED 31.01.2022.