IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 12TH AUGUST 2010 / 21ST SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 18560 of 2010(T) PETITIONER(S): 1. KOVVAL RAMAN, S/O. KUNHATHI, KOROM AMSOM, KANAYI THALIPARAMBA TALUK. 2. P.K.JANAKI, D/O.KELAN NAMBIAR, KUZHUMMAL HOUSE, P.O.KANAYI TALIPARAMBA TALUK. 3. P.K.MEENAKSHI, D/O. KELAN MABIAR, KUZHUMMAL HOUSE, P.O.KANAYIL, THALIPARAMBA TLAUK, 4. P.K. KALLYANI, D/O.KELAN NAMBIAR, KUZHUMMAL HOUSE, P.O.KANAYI, THALIPARAMBA TALUK, KAKKANTE SASIKALA 5. P.K.DEVI, D/O.KELAN NAMBIAR, KUZHUMMAL HOUSE, P.O.KANAYI, THALIPARAMBA TLAUK. 6. P.K.KRISHNAN, S/O. KELAN NAMBIAR, KUZHUMMAL HOUSE, P.O.KANAYI, THALIPARAMBA TLAUK. 7. P.K.PADMANABHAN, S/O. KELAN NAMBIAR KUZHUMMAL HOUSE, P.O.KANAYI, THALIPARAMBA TLAUK. 8. P.K.SAROJINI,D/O.KELAN NAMBIAR, KUZHUMMAL HOUSE,P.O.KANAYI, THALIPARAMBA TALUK. BY ADV. SMT.CELINE JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR. 3. THAHSILDAR, TALIPARAMBA TLAUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. V. MANU - FOR R1-3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 18560 of 2010 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 12th day of August, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioners' grievance in this writ petition is that the land tax in respect of the petitioners' property is not being accepted on the ground that part of the property in the survey number is puramboke land. 2. I have heard both sides. 3. In respect of acceptance of tax for the property in the same village, another person had obtained Ext. P6 judgment, in W.P(C) No. 25782/2008, which reads as follows: “The petitioners, who claim to be owners in possession of different extends of land in Eraman Village in Taliparamba Taluk, are aggrieved that the respondents are declining to accept the basic tax in relation to the properties. The objection raised by the Revenue Authorities in this regard is apparently on the basis that there are puramboke lands in the same survey number and only after surveying and demarcating the puramboke lands, the basic tax can be accepted. This is apart from certain other reasons, which they say, stand in the way of basic tax being accepted. 2. Acceptance of the basic tax by itself is no proof of the title over the property. Title will have to be determined on adjudication by a civil court. The remittance of basic tax is only for fiscal purpose and not for any other purpose. There is no reason why the Revenue Authorities should not accept the basic tax. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to accept the basic tax, if any, remitted by the petitioners in relation to the properties held by them in Eraman Village in Taliparamba Taluk. It is made clear that acceptance of the basic tax will not, by itself, either confer any right on the petitioners or enlarge any such right.” I am in respectful agreement with the said judgment. In the above circumstances, following that judgment, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to accept basic tax tendered by the petitioners in relation to the property held by them in Eranam Village, W.P.C. No. 18560/2010. -: 2 :- Taliparamba Taluk. It is made clear that acceptance of basic tax will not, by itself, either confer any right on the petitioners or enlarge any such right and it would be open to the respondents to take a stand that part of the property is puramboke notwithstanding acceptance of the tax. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE.