Court confirms that property fee demands beyond statutory exemptions are unlawful based on previous rulings.

J U D G M E N T

The petitioners have filed this captioned writ petition seeking to challenge Ext.P2 notice issued by the 1^st respondent, by which an amount of Rs.7,90,650/- was sought to be demanded from the 1^st petitioner with reference to the fair value of the property while considering an application at Form 6 filed by the 1^st petitioner. Insofar as the aforementioned application was submitted with reference to a building having an extent of 3,337 Sq.Ft., an amount of Rs.33,700/- was also demanded from the 1^st petitioner with reference to provisions of Note 1 to Rule 12(9) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Rules , 2008 (hereinafter referred to as 'Rules').

2. I have heard Sri.T.K.Ajithkumar, the learned counsel for the petitioners, as well as Sri.Sunil Nath, the learned Government Pleader.

3. The first issue is with reference to the entitlement of the petitioners for exemption from payment of fee up to 25 cents, which is already decided against the petitioner by the Judgment of the Apex Court in State of Kerala v. Moushmi Ann Jacob [2025 (2) KHC 163] . In the light of the afore, the first issue noticed as above is rejected.

4. At the same time, as regards the second issue, this Court notices that a learned Single Judge of this Court in ABAD Builders Private Limited v. State of Kerala [2025 (1) KLT 310] has held that no fee can be demanded with reference to the provisions of Note 1 to Rule 12(9) of the Rules referred to above.

6. In the light of the afore, the demand of Rs.33,700/- would stand set aside.

The writ petition would stand disposed of in terms of the afore findings. Needless to say, the petitioner would be permitted to make the payment with respect to the first issue noticed as above, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Sd/-