IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 23397 of 2009(T)
1. ALL KERALA BUILDING OWNERS ASSOCIATION
... Petitioner
2. A.J. KURIAKOSE, PUTHIYEDAM KELACHANDRA
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR OF URBAN AFFAIRS,
3. THE DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATHS,
4. KOTTAYAM MUNICIPALITY, KOTTAYAM,
5. MUNDAKAYAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
For Petitioner :SRI.TOM JOSE (PADINJAREKARA)
For Respondent :SRI.SIBY MATHEW
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
Dated :17/08/2009
O R D E R
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
W.P.(C).No.23397 of 2009-T
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 17th day of August, 2009.
JUDGMENT
The petitioners challenge Exts.P2 and P3
Government Orders issued relating to revision of
property tax. Those orders stand stayed by this
Court in different matters. Later, the Government
have withdrawn those orders and directions have
been issued to the Local Self Government
Institutions to recover property tax only under
the existing laws. I do not, therefore, find any
ground to entertain this writ petition. It is
unnecessary in view of G.O.(Ms)No.140/2009/LSGD
dated 22.7.2009 issued freezing Exts.P2 and P3
until further orders.
The petitioners, however, tried to project yet
another case. This is that the revision of
property tax should have a nexus to the fair rent
WP(C)23397/09 -: 2 :-
that may be fixed in terms of Act 2/65. The
controversies pending in different Courts relating
to the rights and the power to fix fair rent under
Act 2/65, though projected by the petitioners, are
irrelevant for the issue in hand since even the
provisions of Act 2/65 have essentially no bearing
on the regulatory provisions governing the
fixation of property tax. Rental value for the
purpose of property tax and fair rent for the
purpose of Act 2/1965 cannot be mixed up to create
a situation, in any manner, interfering with the
legislative competence of the State to bring
amendments to the imposition of property tax under
the provisions of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act or
the Kerala Municipality Act. The writ petition
fails. The same is accordingly dismissed.
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN,
JUDGE.
Sha/250809