IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 9TH JUNE 2009 / 19TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 34275 of 2008(E) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ C.K.AYYAPPAN PILLAI, S/O.KRISHNA PILLAI, CHACKALACKAL HOUSE, UMMANEZHI DESOM, PULAPATTA VILLAGE, OTTAPALAM TALUK. BY ADV. MR.P.R.VENKETESH RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. TAHSILDAR, OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD. 2. VILLAGE OFFICER, KADAMPAZHIPURAM -II VILLAGE, OTTAPALAM TALUK. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K.R. DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.34275/2008 E APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE SURVEH SKETCH OF THE PROPERTY. P2: COPY OF THE BASIC TAX REGISTER MAINTAINED IN THE VILLAGE OFFICE. P3: COPY OF THE RECEIPT EVIDENCING PAYMENT OF FEES UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT TO OBTAIN P.1 AND P2. P4: COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT EVIDENCING PAYMENT OF TAX FOR THE YEAR 1976-77 DTD. 13/02/1978. P5: COPY OF TAX RECEIPT EVIDENCING REMITTANCE OF TAX FOR THE YEAR 1978-79. P6: COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT EVIDENCING REMITTANCE OF TAX FOR THE YEAR 1979-80. P7: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER DTD. 09/05/2006 TO TAHSILDAR. P8: COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DTD. 13/12/2004. P9: COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DTD. 13/12/2004. P10: COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.71482/N1/04 DTD. 7/12/2004. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.34275 of 2008-E = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 9th day of June, 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioner states that he had been paying basic tax for an item of property which is shown in the Thandaper account as belonging to him. With the passage of time, he says that he and his wife were away for a few years, owing to certain domestic issues relating to health, requiring treatment. He pleads that on return, the Revenue authorities are not collecting the basic tax. This is a matter which could, normally, be considered by the superior revenue authorities in the district having jurisdiction over the area. The petitioner states that Tahsildar has issued Ext.P8 on 9.5.2006 directing receipt of tax, if there is no controversy relating to title. But the learned Government Pleader points out that the instructions appear to be that the land in WP(C)34275/08 -: 2 :- question is an item encroached upon and that the said parcel is part of land surrendered by another person under the provisions of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963. As stated in Ext.P8, since the petitioner is the holder of the Thandaper account, there is no reason why basic tax is not received from him. This is all the more so because the State does not get estopped of any plea that it has, regarding title, merely on account of receipt of tax from the person whose name is shown in the Thandaper account, at least, in cases where the Government may have a claim of title rival to that of the petitioner, unless of course, it is lost by adverse possession. For the aforesaid reasons, it is ordered that if the petitioner is shown in the Thandaper account as the owner of the property, basic tax shall be received from him. This shall be done without prejudice to the right of the competent authority in the Government to initiate action on the basis of any allegation that the land in question WP(C)34275/08 -: 3 :- actually vests in the Government by reason of the surrender by Ramankutty Vaidiar in terms of the provisions of the Kerala Land Reforms Act as stated by the learned Government Pleader. Without prejudice to such rights of the Government, this writ petition is ordered as above. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/110609