STATE OF KERALA Vs. MARTIN AUGUSTINE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This review petition is submitted by the Government, seeking review of the judgment passed by this Court. The facts that led to the filing of this review petition are as follows:

(2.) The writ petitioner, who was the owner of a property described as paddy land in the revenue records, obtained Ext.P2 order dtd. 13/8/2012, under Sec. 9 of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as "Paddy Land Act), by filing an application in Form-I, that enables the owner of a paddy land, to construct a residential building on his property described as paddy land. Based on the same, the writ petitioner converted the property and carried out the construction of the building. Thereafter, when Ss. 27A to 27C were introduced in the Paddy Land Act with effect from 30/12/2017, the writ petitioner submitted an application in Form-A, for reassessment of the property as contemplated under Sec. 27C of the Act. Since there arose a confusion with regard to the proper authority to consider the said application, i.e. whether it is the Tahsildar (Land Records) or Tahsildar of the Taluk concerned, the petitioner approached this Court by filing the writ petition.

(3.) The writ petition was disposed of holding that, the proper authority to consider an application under subsec. (2) of Sec. 27C, is the Tahsildar (Land Records) and therefore, a direction was issued to the said Tahsildar, who was the 3rd respondent in the writ petition, to consider the said application and pass appropriate orders. In implementation of the directions in the judgment, the property was reassessed, but in the tax receipt, the description of the property was shown as "Nilam". Therefore, a Contempt of Court Case was submitted by the petitioner as Con.Case(C) No.1170/2025 alleging non-compliance of the directions issued by this Court.