R.SAVITHAMMAL Vs. THE TAHSILDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was an assessee for agricultural income tax and sales tax. Consequent to the default to pay the tax demanded, the petitioner's land was put in auction. The State purchased the land having an extent of 3.73 in Survey No.108/1 and 109/1 of Varanagad Village under Section 50 of Revenue Recovery Act as bought in land on 27.6.1985. The petitioner remitted the entire amount due under the Assessment order on 18.12.2003. The petitioner initiated proceedings for re - conveyance of the land. The District Collector refused to the request of the petitioner and directed the petitioner to remit the current market value of the land as contemplated in Government Order No.(MS No.196/ 96 RD 22/91. The petitioner, aggrieved by the direction of the District Collector approached this Court in W.P.(C) No.34407/2003. This Court directed the petitioner to remit 50%. The petitioner withdrew the writ petition with liberty. The issue in this writ petition is whether the petitioner is entitled for re -conveyance of the land without paying the market value of the land.

(2.) The Government order regarding the re -conveyance of the bought in land dated 22.3.1996 is produced along with the memo by the Government order. The relevant Government Order reads as follows:

(3.) If the land is exclusively vested with the Government, certainly, the re -conveyance can be only based on the aforesaid Government Order. However, the question emerges in view of the fact that the petitioner was allowed to discharge the liability in the year 2003 by remitting the entire amount due under the Government Order. Therefore, the question, in such circumstances is whether the Government Order as such would apply or not.