IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 24TH OCTOBER 2008 / 2ND KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 2417 of 2004(K) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- NAZEEM SHERIEF, NIZHAD MANZIL, CHITHARA, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SURESH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. 3. THE SUB COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM. 5. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, CHITHARA, KOLLAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. TEKCHAND THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT ISSUED BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT DATED 24.12.1998 EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT IN THE APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER AGAINST EXT.P1 ORDER DATED 3.1.2003 EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT DATED 6.2.2003 EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT IN THE APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER AGAINST EXT.P3 ORDER DATED 11.8.2003 EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER AGAINST EXT.P4 ORDER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 11.9.2003 EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE FIFTH RESPONDENT DATED 24.2.1999 EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE FIFTH RESPONDENT DATED 19.3.2003 EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE FIFTH RESPONDENT DATED 11.9.2003 EXT.P9 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 19.12.2003 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 2417 OF 2004 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT Heard counsel for the petitioner and Government Pleader for the respondents. Writ Petition is filed challenging revised assessment of building tax in respect of a commercial building constructed by the petitioner in two stages. The first part was constructed in 1994 and assessment was made in 1995. Later in 1997 petitioner made additional construction to the building increasing the plinth area. The assessment made thereafter was subject matter of appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer, who remanded the matter to the Tahsildar for revision of assessment. In the revised assessment the current rate of tax was applied for the entire plinth area of the building and rebate was granted for the tax paid earlier. It is against this order that the petitioner has approached this Court contending that revised rate should not be applied to the building constructed prior to 1996. Even though counsel for the petitioner contended that at least for the portion constructed in 1994 petitioner should not be called upon to pay the rate 2 of tax introduced in July, 1996, I am unable to accept this contention because Section 5(4) of the Building Tax Act provides for assessment of a building completed in stages by applying the current rate of tax for the entire plinth area and by giving rebate for the tax paid earlier. Validity of Sectiosn 5(4) is upheld by this Court vide decision in SIMON, T.A. V. TAHSILDAR, 2008 (3) KHC 582 (DB). Since Section 5(4) is found to be valid and assessment is in accordance with Section 5(4), there is no scope for interference. W.P. is accordingly dismissed as devoid of any merit. (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge kk 3