IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 7TH JUNE 2011 / 17TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 37716 of 2010(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MOOCHIKKAL HAMZA HAJI, S/O.MOHAMMEDKUTTY, TRIPRANGODE AMSOM, KAYINJIKKARA DESOM,TIRUR TALUK BY ADV. SRI.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,PALAKKAD PIN-678001 2. THE TAHASILDAR,OTTAPPALAM-678101 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VADANAMKURISSY,OTTAPPALAM TALUK-678888 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI HANIL KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 37716 of 2010 APPENDIX EXHIBITS EXT.P1- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.9.81 EXT.P2- TRUE COPIES OF TAX RECEIPTS EXT.P3- TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE SDT, TLB, OTTAPPALAM DATED 11.6.02 EXT.P4- TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C).19992/06 (TRUE COPY) P.A TO JUDGE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J ....................................................... W.P.(C).37716/2010 .............................................. Dated this the 7th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT The grievance of the petitioner, as given in the writ petition, is that, in spite of the petitioner's title over the property, as covered by Ext.P1, and in spite of the fact that, basic tax was being accepted for the previous years, the same is now being refused to be accepted, referring to some 'ceiling case' stated as pending, which cannot be a ground to interdict the rights and liberties of the petitioner in enjoying the property in an effective manner, remitting the basic tax. 2. The second respondent has filed a counter affidavit wherein, the reason for not accepting the tax is stated in the following terms. 2. .....The version of the Taluk Land Board, Ottapalam is that the surplus lands taken over in this case and the lands possessed by others are lying in such a way that the surplus land taken over are having not an approach way to be entered into W.P.(C).37716/10 2 causing difficulty to either of the parties. This case is still under the consideration of Taluk Land Board, Ottapalam, and yet to be decided. 4. There are some discrepancies that the surplus land ordered to be taken over has some differences in survey numbers and extent of lands, and some lands taken over are not having, pathway to be entered. Therefore, the Taluk Land Board, Ottapalam has to be issued a revised order to rectify the discrepancies. 5. A clarification ordered by this Honourable Court to be taken by the Taluk Land Board, Ottapalam. In obedience of the order of this Honourable Court, for the time being no further steps are being taken from this respondent's office, in this regard. A decision is yet pending before the Taluk Land Board, Ottapalam. Therefore, the tax cannot be collected, in such a case pending before the Taluk Land Board. 3. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that the matter can be finalized, giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner with reference to the W.P.(C).37716/10 3 actual facts and figures, if the petitioner approaches the second respondent, who is the competent authority in this regard. 4. In the above circumstances, the second respondent is directed to verify the actual facts and figures as to the claim put forth by the petitioner and if the petitioner has been satisfying the tax already, on the strength of the mutation effected, the tax in respect of the due years shall also be accepted from him, for which the pendency of the proceedings before the concerned Taluk Land Board shall not be treated as a bar. However, in view of the settled position of law, mere remittance of the tax by itself, does not declare or confer any title. Writ petition is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, Judge mrcs