SIDHIQ Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging Exts. P10 and P11 Revenue Recovery notices issued by the 5th respondent herein by which an amount of Rs.4,93,992.00 is sought to be recovered solely on the basis of certain audit objections raised by the 4th respondent herein.

(2.) Short facts necessary for the disposal of this writ petition are as follows: The petitioner, who claims to be the owner and in possession of 20 cents of land comprised in Sy. Nos.1692/8 & 9 of Nedumangad Village and Taluk, constructed a 3 storeyed building in the said property, on the basis of a building permit issued by the local authority. After the construction was completed, on 28/1/2002, the Village Officer, Nedumangad, issued a notice to the petitioner, pointing out that 2 pillars of the building-1st and 11th -are abutting the puramboke land by 20cms. Therefore, the petitioner submitted an application to the 3rd respondent for assigning that portion of that land allegedly encroached on and used by him. Later, it was pointed out that the petitioner applied for a lease under Rule 12 of the Assignment of Land Within Municipality and Corporation Areas Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules' for short). By Ext. P1 order, the 3rd respondent granted sanction of lease of 1.64 cents of land. The rent payable was fixed at 10% of the market value of the land. Altogether, an amount of Rs.1,80,192.00 was demanded from the petitioner. It is pointed out that on receipt of Ext. P1, the petitioner submitted Ext. P2 appeal before the 2nd respondent herein. Along with the filing of the appeal as above, an amount of Rs.25,000.00 is remitted by the petitioner.

(3.) The appeal filed, as above, is disposed of by the 2nd respondent herein by Ext. P5 order dtd. 1/12/2005. In this order, the 2nd respondent has found as under: "Findings: