High Court of KeralaSingle JudgePetition disposed of with directions as stated ...

K.I. Paul v. Tahsildar (LR), Land Records, Taluk Office, Kothamangalam and Village Officer, Kothamangalam

Case / Petition Number:WP(C) No. 22276 of 2023

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • Murali Purushothaman J.
Judgment Date
2024-03-07
Court Decision / Holding
Writ petition disposed of with directions that the 1st respondent shall consider Ext.P8 Form-A, taking note of Ext.P3 KLU Order, and reclassify the property as purayidam and reassess the land tax; to pass appropriate orders within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.
Final Disposition
Petition disposed of with directions as stated above.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • K.I. Paul

Respondents

  • The Tahasilar (Land Records) Taluk Office, Kothamangalam
  • The Village Officer, The Village Office, Kothamangalam

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Rinny Stephen Chamaparampl
  • • Asha Elizabeth Mathew
  • • Anjana S.

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Smt. G. Sheeba, GP

Case Synopsis & Summary

Facts and issue: The petitioner, K. I. Paul, claims ownership and possession of 27.81 acres (68.69 cents) of land in Sy.No.1020/6-4 of Kothamangalam Village within Kothamangalam Municipality. The predecessor obtained Ext.P3 order under Clause 6(2) of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967, allowing conversion of the land on condition that it be used for cultivation of paddy or other food crops. After several transfers, the petitioner acquired the 27.81 acres, which formed part of the land covered by Ext.P3. Although Ext.P3 specified the conversion, the revenue records were not reassessed, and the petitioner filed Ext.P8 Form-A under Section 6A of the Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961 before the Tahsildar (LR) seeking reassessment and reclassification. The petitioner contends that no further order under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 (Act 2008) is required, since the land was already converted and should be treated as purayidam for tax purposes. The Tahsildar LR counters that Ext.P3 merely permits cultivation of paddy/food crops and does not prove conversion to dry land; relying on Shameem P.K. and related judgments, this Court previously directed the Tahsildar to consider Ext.P8 Form-A, with Ext.P3 in view, and to reclassify the property as purayidam and reassess the land tax. In Ext.P9, the Court's earlier order in respect of another extent was cited. The Court disposed of the petition with directions to issue Ext.P8 orders within two months.

Provisions of Law Cited

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

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

Petitioner contends that Ext.P3 KLU Order, dated 15/10/2001, converted the land to be used for cultivation of paddy and food crops; that the order allows conversion and triggers reclassification, and that no further proceedings under Act, 2008 are required. He relies on Shameem P.K. (2021) (2) KHC 373 and Ext.P9, which directed handling of Form-A applications (Ext.P8) and reclassification as purayidam and reassessment. He seeks that Form-A be entertained and land tax records updated accordingly, based on Ext.P3. The petitioner also notes that revenue records were not updated after the order and asks for prompt relief.

Contentions of Respondents

Tahsildar LR counters that Ext.P3 permits only cultivation of paddy/food crops and does not show dry-land conversion; Ext.P9 judgments in respect of another extent are distinguishable; authorities must reflect current classification in tax records and must proceed under Act 2008 if needed. They rely on procedural safeguards and seek adherence to legal requirements, arguing either dismissal or modification of relief.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Shameem P.K. and Others v. R.D.O, Idukki and Others2021 (2) KHC 373PositiveCited as authority for treating land converted under the KLU Order as exempt from additional 27A proceedings and for guiding reclassification/reassessment in light of Ext.P3.
W.P.(C) No. 42511/2022—PositiveExhibit P9 Judgment cited to support the relief of entertaining Form-A and reclassification in a similar matter; the Court relies on that judgment's approach.

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 K.I. Paul v. Tahsildar (LR), Land Records, Taluk Office, Kothamangalam and Village Officer, Kothamangalam 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 MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN** **THURSDAY, THE 7[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 17TH PHALGUNA, 1945** ## **WP(C) NO. 22276 OF 2023** ## **PETITIONER:** **K.I. PAUL, AGED 63 YEARS S/O. ISSAC, KUTTICHIRAKUDIYIL, OONNUKAL P.O. KOTHAMANGALAM, PIN - 686693** **BY ADVS. RINNY STEPHEN CHAMAPARAMPIL ASHA ELIZABETH MATHEW ANJANA S.** ## **RESPONDENTS:** **1 THE TAHASILAR (LAND RECORDS) TALUK OFFICE, KOTHAMANGALAM, PIN - 686691 2 THE VILLAGE OFFICER THE VILLAGE OFFICE, KOTHAMANGALAM, PIN - 686692** ## **OTHER PRESENT:** ## **SMT.G.SHEEBA, GP** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **WP(C) NO. 22276 OF 2023 : 2 :** ## **JUDGMENT** The petitioner is the owner in possession of 27.81 Ares (68.69 cents) of land comprised in Sy.No.1020/6-4 of Kothamangalam Village within the territorial limits of Kothamangalam Municipality. The said land was part of a larger extent of 3 Acres 22 cents in Sy.No.1020/6 and the predecessor in interest of the petitioner had obtained Ext.P3 order under Clause 6(2) of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 (for short 'the KLU Order') for conversion of the land subject to the condition that after conversion, the land should be used only for cultivation of paddy or other food crops. After several transactions, the petitioner purchased 27.81 Ares of land forming part of the land for which Ext.P3 KLU **WP(C) NO. 22276 OF 2023 : 3 :** Order was issued. The petitioner states that pursuant to Ext.P3 KLU Order, the property was converted as dry land in the year 2001. 2. However, based on the KLU Order, the land was not reassessed in the revenue records. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted Ext.P8 application in Form-A under Section 6A of the Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961 before the 1[st] respondent Tahsildar (LR). The petitioner states that the 1[st] respondent is not considering the application for the reason that Ext.P3 KLU Order has been issued to convert the land on the specific condition to cultivate paddy and other food crops and therefore, the petitioner has to obtain orders under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 (for short 'the Act, 2008) for reassessing/ **WP(C) NO. 22276 OF 2023 : 4 :** reclassifying the land. The petitioner states that in view of Ext.P3 KLU Order, no further order under Act, 2008 is required for making additional entries in the basic tax register. The petitioner relies on the decision of this Court in **Shameem P.K. And Others** v. **R.D.O, Idukki and Others** [2021 (2) KHC 373] and Ext.P9 judgment of this Court. Ext.P9 judgment is rendered in respect of another extent of 27.81 Ares of land in Sy.No.1020/6-3 of Kothamangalam Village covered by Ext.P3 KLU order. 3. As regards Ext.P9, resisting the prayer of the petitioner therein for reassessing and reclassifying the land based on Ext.P3 KLU Order, a counter affidavit was filed by the Tahsildar (LR) contending that in Ext.P3 KLU Order permission was granted to raise the land only to make it fit for cultivation of **WP(C) NO. 22276 OF 2023 : 5 :** paddy and other food crops and it cannot be said that the land has been converted as dry land. This Court, following the decision in **Shameem** (supra) and other judgments, allowed the writ petition directing the Tahsildar (LR) to consider Form-A application submitted by the petitioner, taking note of Ext.P3 KLU order and to reclassify the nature of the property as 'purayidam' and reassess the land tax. The petitioner submits that pursuant to Ext.P9 judgment, the Tahsildar (LR) issued Ext.P10 order reclassifying the nature of the said property as purayidam and reassessing the land tax. The petitioner states that he is also entitled for similar relief as in Exts.P9 and P10. 4. In **Shameem** (supra), this Court observed that when there is an order under the KLU Order, **WP(C) NO. 22276 OF 2023 : 6 :** and the land has actually been converted prior to 30.12.2017, then such land does not have to undergo the process under Section 27A of the Act, 2008. In Ext.P9 judgment, in respect of another land covered by Ext.P3 KLU order, this Court held that for reassessing the land covered by KLU order, no application need be submitted under the Act, 2008. Pursuant to Ext.P9 judgment, Ext.P10 order was passed by the Tahsildar (LR) reclassifying the said property as purayidam and reassessing the land tax. Thus, in view of the dictum laid down in **Shameem** and Ext.P9 there will be a (supra) judgment, direction to the 1[st] respondent to take up Ext.P8 Form-A application submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon, taking note of Ext.P3 KLU order and reclassify the nature of the **WP(C) NO. 22276 OF 2023 : 7 :** property as purayidam and reassess the land tax. Orders shall be passed on Ext.P8 within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The petitioner shall produce the copy of the judgment along with the copy of the writ petition before the 1[st] respondent for due compliance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- **MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE** SB ## **WP(C) NO. 22276 OF 2023 : 8 :** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS** - **Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 11/04/2023 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER; KOTHAMANGALAM** - **Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE NOTIFIED DATA BANK OF KOTHAMANGALAM MUNICIPALITY** - **Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE KLU ORDER DATED 15/10/2001 ISSUED BY THE RDO, MUVATTUPUZHA** - **Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO. 6550/2005 DATED 24/10/2005 OF SRO, KOTHAMANGALAM** - **Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.6551/2005 DATED 24/10/2005 OF SRO, KOTHAMANGALAM** - **Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF PARTITION DEED NO. 559/2011/I DATED 24/01/2011 OF SRO, KOTHAMANGALAM** - **Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF PARTITION DEED NO. 589/11/I DATED 28/01/2011 OF SRO, KOTHAMANGALAM** - **Exhibit P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 25/05/2023 IN FORM A SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT** - **Exhibit P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 07/03/2023 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P.(C)NO.42511/2022** - **Exhibit P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28/4/2023 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT** - **Exhibit P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 04/05/2023 ISSUED FROM THE VILLAGE OFFICE, KOTHAMANGALAM**