IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 8TH APRIL 2010 / 18TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 12561 of 2010(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(: --------------- OLIYANTAKATH ABDU HAJI, S/O.ALI MUHAMMED HAJI, AGED 60 YEARS, PADAPPENGAD P.O., CHAPPARAPPADAV, TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.O.V.MANIPRASAD RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, TALIPARAMBA TALUK, TALIPARAMBA P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOOVERI VILLAGE, KOOVERI P.O., TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY GOVT.PLEADER SHRI P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ---------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.12561 OF 2010 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 8th DAY OF APRIL, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is aggrieved by the refusal of respondents 2 and 3 to clear the land tax with regard to the property owned by him. He is having 59 cents of land purchased as per Exhibit P1. The assignor was also having 97 cents land and she had obtained purchase certificate from the Deputy Collector, Land Tribunal, Kannur as per Exhibit P2. It is pointed out that thereafter the 2nd respondent has effected transfer of registry in the name of the petitioner. Exhibits P3 and P4 will show that he was paying the tax also. 2. There was a proceedings as Ceiling Case No.TLB 230/1973 against one Kodiyil Aboobacker Siddique. The predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner had approached the Taluk Land Board under Section 85(8) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act for a direction to exempt her properties from the ceiling case. Accordingly, the Taluk Land Board passed Exhibit P5order which was challenged by the Government in W.P.(C)No.12561/10 -2- C.R.P.No.1707/97. The C.R.P. Was dismissed as per Exhibit P6 judgment, which according to the petitioner has become final. The petitioner purchased the property, after the Land Board passed Exhibit P5 order. 3. The petitioner, therefore, filed Exhibit P7 representation and seeks for a direction to the 3rd respondent to take a decision on the same and receive the land tax. It is pointed out that with respect to similarly placed parties, this Court has already passed Exhibit P8 judgment and the petitioner's case also may be considered in the light of the directions issued in Exhibit P8. 4. There will be a direction to the 3rd respondent to take a decision on Exhibit P7 after considering the orders passed by the Taluk Land Board and that of this Court in C.R.P.No.1707/97 within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner will produce a copy of the Writ Petition along with a copy of the judgment for compliance. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE dsn