High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2023-07-07Writ petition allowed; policy directed that Ext...

Chandramathy and others v. District Collector, Malappuram and others

Case / Petition Number:WP(C) NO.18173 OF 2023

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: N. Nagareesh
Judgment Date: 2023-07-07
Court Decision / Holding: Writ petition allowed. The 3rd respondent Tahsildar (LR) is directed to consider Ext.P9 Form-A application submitted by the 1st petitioner, in accordance with law, and pass appropriate orders thereon within one month.
Final Disposition: Writ petition allowed; policy directed that Ext.P9 be processed and appropriate orders passed within one month by the Tahsildar (LR).

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Chandramathy
P.V. Chandran
Jayalakshmi
Vijayaraghavan P. V.

Respondents

District Collector, Malappuram, Malappuram District
Revenue Divisional Officer, Perinthalmanna, Perinthalmanna
L R Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Perinthalmanna
Village Officer, Nemmini Village, Oravampuram, Thachinganadam P.O., Malappuram
Agricultural Officer, Krishi Bhavan, Keezha ttur, Poonthavanam, Malappuram

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• MARIAN G.M.THARAKAN
• Adv.

Counsels for Respondents

• SMT.DEVISREE. R - GP
• Adv.

Case Synopsis & Summary

Chandramathy and three other petitioners, landowners in Nemmini Village, challenged the omission of the 3rd respondent Tahsildar (LR) from entertaining their application for reassessment of the Basic Tax rate on their land and for entries in the Basic Tax Register. They own about 30.30 Ares in Survey Nos. 177/4 and 75/5A in Thachinganadam Desom. Their predecessor had obtained an order under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 (Ext. P5) in 1981 permitting non-agricultural use of the land. Despite this enabling order, the land continued to be described as Nilam/Paddy land in revenue records, and the petitioners filed Ext. P9 under Section 6(3) of the Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961 seeking reassessment and entries in the Basic Tax Register. The Tahsildar did not decide the application, prompting the writ petition. The Government Pleader resisted, arguing that Ext. P5 requires verification and current land status must be ascertained before any reassessment. The Court relied on Mary Abraham v. State of Kerala and District Collector, Ernakulam v. Fr. Jose Uppani, which held that after a valid KL U Order, earlier classifications become redundant and a fresh assessment under Section 6A is mandatory; and that post-2008, authorities must consider subsequent Form 5A under the Kerala Land Tax Act. The petition is allowed, with the Tahsildar directed to process Ext. P9 within one month.

Provisions of Law Cited

Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 – Clause 6Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961 – Section 6(3)Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 – Rule 6(2)Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961 – Section 6AKerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 – Section 27A

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contend that once the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 was invoked to convert land for non-agricultural purposes (Ext.P5 in 1981), there is no longer any basis to retain Nilam/Paddy land status in revenue records. They submitted Ext.P9 under Section 6(3) of the Kerala Land Tax Act seeking reassessment and updates to the Basic Tax Register; the Tahsildar has not acted. They rely on earlier judicial dicta confirming that enabling orders trigger fresh assessment and entries, and that authorities must re-assess the land tax once conversion is sanctioned. They stress the need for timely decision on Ext.P9 and the correctness of metadata in the Basic Tax Register.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents resisted, arguing Ext.P5 requires verification of genuineness and current land status before any reassessment. They maintain that the status must be confirmed and that there has been no final action on Ext.P9. The Government Pleader defended the position, noting the need to verify Ext.P5 and to ascertain the present factual status of the land before re-assessment under the Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Mary Abraham v. State of Kerala and others	2020 (4) KLT 448	Positive	The decision cited supports that once a KL U Order enabling conversion is issued, the prior entries (Nilam/Paddy) become redundant and a fresh assessment should be done under Section 6A of the Kerala Land Tax Act.
District Collector, Ernakulam and others v. Fr.Jose Uppani and others	2020 (4) KLT 612	Positive	The Division Bench held that where orders under KL Utilisation Order predate the cut-off date for Section 27A, subsequent Form 5A applications must be considered; this supports reassessment and entry changes.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Chandramathy and others v. District Collector, Malappuram and others and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH`** ## **`FRIDAY, THE 7[TH] DAY OF JULY 2023 / 16TH ASHADHA, 1945`** ## **`WP(C) NO. 18173 OF 2023`** ## **`PETITIONERS:`** - `1 CHANDRAMATHY AGED 86 YEARS, W/O SHEKHAR VARRIER, GOKULAM, ORAVAMPURAM, THACHINGANADAM P. O. MALAPPURAM, KERALA, PIN – 679 325` - `2 P.V. CHANDRAN AGED 65 YEARS, S/O SEKHARA VARRIER, GOKULAM, ORAVAMPURAM, THACHINGANADAM P. O. MALAPPURAM, KERALA, PIN – 679 325` - `3 JAYALAKSHMI AGED 63 YEARS, W/O PRABHAKARAN, GOKULAM, ORAVAMPURAM, THACHINGANADAM P. O. MALAPPURAM, KERALA, PIN – 679 325` - `4 VIJAYARAGHAVAN P. V. AGED 60 YEARS, S/O SEKHAR VARRIER, GOKULAM, ORAVAMPURAM, THACHINGANADAM P. O. MALAPPURAM, KERALA, PIN – 679 325` ``` BY ADV MARIAN G.M.THARAKAN ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** - `1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, CONFERENCE HALL, COLLECTORATE RD, UP HILL, MALAPPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 676 505` - `2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PERINTHALMANNA MINI CIVIL STATION, PATTAMBI ROAD, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM KERALA, PIN – 676 101` - `3 THE L R TAHSILDAR TALUK OFFICE, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM, KERALA, PIN – 679 322` - `4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER NEMMINI VILLAGE, ORAVAMPURAM, TACHINGANADAM P.O. MALAPPURAM, KERALA, PIN – 679 325` ``` W.P(C) NO.18173 OF 2023 ``` ``` 2 ``` ``` 5AGRICULTURAL OFFICER KRISHI BHAVAN, LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE KEEZHATTUR P.O. POONTHAVANAM, MALAPPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 679325 ``` ``` BY ADV SMT.DEVISREE. R - GP ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` W.P(C) NO.18173 OF 2023 ``` ``` 3 ``` ## **JUDGMENT** Dated this the 7[th] day of July, 2023 The petitioners are before this Court aggrieved by the omission of the 3[rd ] respondent-Tahsildar (LR) in entertaining an application submitted by the petitioners for re-assessment of rate of Basic Tax of land and for making necessary entries in the Basic Tax Register. 2. The petitioners are owners of 30.30 Ares of property in Survey Nos.177/4 and 75/5A of Thachinganadam Desom, Nemmini Village in Perinthalmanna Taluk, Malappuram District. The predecessor-in-interest of the land approached the Revenue Divisional Officer invoking the provisions of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 seeking to permit to use the land for non-agricultural purposes. The Revenue Divisional Officer passed Ext.P5 order under Clause 6 of the Kerala Land ``` W.P(C) NO.18173 OF 2023 ``` ``` 4 ``` Utilisation Order, 1967 permitting to use the land for nonagricultural purposes. 3. The grievance of the petitioners is that even though Ext.P5 order was passed under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 in the year 1981, the land of the petitioner is not re-assessed for fixing rate of Basic Tax and the property of the petitioner is still described as paddy land in the Revenue records. The 1[st] petitioner therefore submitted Ext.P9 application invoking Section 6(3) of the Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961 seeking to re-assess the Basic Tax and to make necessary additions in the Basic Tax Register. The Tahsildar, however, has not passed any orders on the application. Hence, the petitioners have approached this Court. 4. The Government Pleader entered appearance on behalf of the respondents and resisted the writ petition. The Government Pleader controverted all the material allegations made by the petitioners in the writ petition. It is submitted that ``` W.P(C) NO.18173 OF 2023 ``` ## **`5`** Ext.P5 proceedings are of the year 1981. The veracity and the genuineness of Ext.P5 proceedings under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 are liable to be verified. The present status of the land will also have to be ascertained, before reassessment of Basic Tax under the Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader representing the respondents. 6. This Court has considered the issue of reassessment of land tax on the basis of the orders obtained under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 in the judgment in _**Mary Abraham v. State of Kerala and others**_ [2020 (4) KLT 448]. This Court held that once enabling order is passed under Rule 6(2) of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 permitting conversion of the land, then the earlier entries in the BTR showing the land as Nilam, Paddy Land, etc. will become superfluous and redundant and the competent Revenue officials like the Tahsildar are ``` W.P(C) NO.18173 OF 2023 ``` ``` 6 ``` obliged under law to make a fresh assessment of the property under Section 6A of the Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961. 7. A Division Bench of this Court also considered the issue in _**District Collector, Ernakulam and others v. Fr.Jose Uppani and others** [2020 (4) KLT 612_ ] and the Division Bench held that when an applicant has secured orders under the Kerala Land Utiliation Order prior to the cut-off date on which Section 27A was introduced to the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008, the competent Revenue officials are bound to consider the subsequent application submitted under the provisions of the Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961. 8. As the nature of the land of the petitioners have been permitted to be changed pursuant to passing of a statutory order under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967, the competent authority is bound to re-assess the rate of Basic Tax in respect of the land and to make necessary entries in the ``` W.P(C) NO.18173 OF 2023 ``` ``` 7 ``` Basic Tax Register, if necessary, after verifying the veracity/genuineness of the permission obtained under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 produced by the petitioners. The writ petition is therefore allowed. The 3[rd] respondentTahsildar (LR) is directed to consider Ext.P9 Form-A application submitted by the 1[st] petitioner, in accordance with law, and pass appropriate orders thereon within a period of one month. **N.NAGARESH JUDGE** ded ``` W.P(C) NO.18173 OF 2023 ``` ``` 8 ``` ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18173/2023`** ``` PETITIONER EXHIBITS ``` |`EXHIBIT`|`1`|`TRUE COPY OF THE WILL EXECUTED BY`| |---|---|---| |||`IKKALI VARASSIER DATED 19/10/1970`| |`EXHIBIT`|`2`|`TRUE COPY OF THE LEGAL HEIRSHIP`| |||`CERTIFICATE DATED 10/06/2021 ISSUED BY`| |||`THE TAHSILDAR, PERINTHALMANNA`| |`EXHIBIT`|`3`|`TRUE COPY OF THE PARTITION DEED`| |||`EXECUTED BETWEEN P.V. SEKHAR VARRIER`| |||`AND OTHERS DATED 15/10/1970`| |`EXHIBIT`|`4`|`TRUE COPY OF THE TAX PAID RECEIPT DATED`| |||`29/07/2022 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE`| |||`OFFICER NENMINI VILLAGE`| |`EXHIBIT`|`5`|`TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE SUB`| |||`COLLECTOR, PERINTHALMANNA DATED`| |||`31/12/1981 - K.DIS.12778/81(G)`| |`EXHIBIT`|`6`|`TRUE COPY OF THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT`| |||`ORDERS NO.4592/2017 DATED 31/10/2017`| |`EXHIBIT`|`7`|`TRUE COPY OF THE 1ST PETITIONER'S`| |||`LETTER DATED 26/10/2021 TO THE 3RD`| |||`RESPONDENT`| |`EXHIBIT`|`8`|`TRUE COPY OF THE KEEZHATTUR GRAMA`| |||`PANCHAYAT GAZETTE NOTIFICATION DATED`| |||`05/03/2012`| |`EXHIBIT`|`9`|`TRUE COPY OF FORM A U/S 6(3) RULE 5(II)`| |||`SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER`| |`EXHIBIT`|`10`|`TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF`| |||`REVENUE DEPARTMENT REF. FILE NO.REV-`| |||`P1/26/2021-REV DATED 23/01/2021`| |`EXHIBIT`|`11`|`TRUE COPY OF THE RESPONSE OF THE 3RD`| |||`RESPONDENT DATED 17/11/2021 TO THE 1ST`| |||`PETITIONER`| |`EXHIBIT`|`12`|`TRUE COPY OF THE NENMINI VILLAGE`| |||`OFFICER'S, REPORT DATED 17/02/2022 TO`| |||`THE TAHSILDAR (LR), PERINTHALMANNA`| |`EXHIBIT`|`13`|`TRUE COPY OF THE PRINT OUT OF THE 1ST`| |||`PETITIONER'S EMAIL DATED 02/12/2021 TO`| |||`THE 1ST RESPONDENT`| ``` W.P(C) NO.18173 OF 2023 ``` ``` 9 ``` - `EXHIBIT 14 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 04/04/2022 MADE TO THE REVENUE MINISTER BY THE 1ST PETITIONER` - `EXHIBIT 15 TRUE COPY OF THE DIRECTIONS ISSUED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE TO THE DISTRICT COLLECTORS - REF.LR/8569/2022LR(A4) DATED 01/08/2022` - `EXHIBIT 16 TRUE COPY OF LETTER COMMUNICATION DATED 08/08/2022 REF 1/168669/2022 ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR MALAPPURAM TO THE TAHSILDAR` - `EXHIBIT 17 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION NOT DATED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER TO THE CHIEF MINISTER OF KERALA` - `EXHIBIT 18 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY FROM THE CMO'S OFFICE DATED 28/10/2022` - `EXHIBIT 19 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION MADE BY THE 2ND PETITIONER UNDER FORM 5 DATED 11/01/2023` - `EXHIBIT 20 TRUE COPY OF THE RESPONSE DATED 15/01/2023 FROM THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT TO THE 1ST PETITIONER` - `EXHIBIT P21 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE SUB COLLECTOR, PERINTHALMANNA DATED 24/05/2023 IN RESPONSE TO FORM 5A APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONERS` - `EXHIBIT P22 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDERS OF SUB COLLECTOR, PERINTHALMANNA DATED 03/09/2020 TO THE KRISHI OFFICER KARRUVARAKUNDU` - `EXHIBIT P23 TRUE COPY OF THE KERALA GAZETTE NOTIFICATION OF THE KEEZHATTUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT DATED 05/03/2012`