IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 8TH ASWINA 1931 OP.No. 20742 of 2002(T) ----------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- V.P.SULAIKHA, W/O. MAMMU HAJI, AGED 38 YEARS, KAROKOD HOUSE, CHERUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.AMARESAN SRI.V.N.RAMESAN NAMBISAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR. 2. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, THALASSERY. 3. TAHSILDAR, (ASSESSING AUTHORITY) TALIPARAMBA. 4. VILLAGE OFFICER, VAYAKARA P.O., TALIPARAMBA TALUK. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER(TAX) SRI. K.P. PRADEEP THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP.No. 20742 of 2002(T) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE REMANDED ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEARING NO. REF. F. 3750/95 DATED 15.8.95. EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 4.10.1995. EXT.P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. REF. G1-29185/2001 DATED 18.5.2002. EXT.P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PLAN. // TRUE COPY // PA TO JUDGE rhs S. SIRI JAGAN, J ............................................... O.P. No. 20742 of 2002 ................................................. Dated this the 30th day of September, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner constructed the ground floor of a building in 1983 and he paid building tax under the Kerala Building Tax Act in respect of the ground floor at that time. Thereafter the petitioner constructed the first and second floors to that building as also a shed. The 3rd respondent assessed the entire building consisting of three floors to building tax and demanded building tax amounting to Rs.55,200/-. Against that order, the petitioner filed a revision petition under Section 13. But the 1st respondent directed the 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of the same as an appeal. Appeal was considered and the 2nd respondent demanded the matter for fresh disposal directing adjustment of the tax already paid in respect of the ground floor, that is Ext.P1. Subsequently by Ext.P2, the 3rd respondent deducted the tax already paid and again assessed the entire three floors and the shed to building tax. The petitioner filed a revision petition before the 1st respondent. That was dismissed by Ext.P3 order. Dismissal of the revision was on the ground that there is no O.P. No. 20742 of 2002 -2- evidence to show that the building was constructed in 1983. The petitioner is challenging Ext.P3 order. According to the petitioner, the petitioner is liable to pay tax for the first and second floors only and the entire building cannot be reassessed adjusting the tax already paid. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. The learned Government Pleader would admit that the issue involved is settled by the decision of this court in Abdul Rasheed v. Tahsildar [2005(2) KLT 819]. It is therefore not disputed before me that in the case of the petitioner, the assessment has to be completed under Section 5(3) of the Kerala Building Tax Act whereas the assessment was completed under Section 5(4). In the above circumstances, the impugned orders are quashed and the 3rd respondent is directed to complete assessment of the petitioner's building under Section 5(3) of the Kerala Building Tax Act. The writ petition is allowed as above. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs