M.K.BASHEER Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner seeks to quash Exhibit-P1 and to declare that the sale proceedings and the improper bidding of the 1/5th share of the petitioner over his ancestral property having an extent of 0.2546 Hectares of landed property comprised in Survey No.112/1 of Choondal Village in the name of the Government under Section 50(2)(i) of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act as bought-in-land for Re.1, is illegal and is liable to be set aside.

(2.) The petitioner states that he was the Proprietor of Classic Rubbers and an assessee of sales tax. The business failed and sales tax for the years 1990-2000, 1993-1994, 2001-2002, 2002-2003 and 2003-2004 remained unpaid. Respondents 6 and 7-Tax Officers fixed the liability of the petitioner at ?21,62,386/-. At the instance of respondents 6 and 7, respondents 2 to 5 initiated revenue recovery proceedings to realise the sales tax dues. The property standing in the name of the petitioner's father late Sri. Kuju Moidu having an extent of 0.2546 Hectares comprised in Survey No.112/1 of Choondal Village, Thalappilly Taluk was attached. The petitioner had only 1/5 th share of the property. The undivided property was notified for sale in public auction. In the absence of any bidder to purchase the property, the Government purchased the 1/5 th share for Re.1 invoking Section 50(2) of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act as per Exhibit-P1, on 03.10.2008.

(3.) The petitioner could not raise funds to clear sale tax arrears. However, the petitioner applied under Amnesty Scheme to reduce the arrears of sales tax. The petitioner also submitted an application before the first respondent- State of Kerala to re-convey the property to the petitioner on payment of sales tax arrears. By Exhibit-P2, the first respondent directed the second respondent-District Collector to submit a detailed report regarding the issue. The 2 nd respondent on 15.11.2017 intimated the 1 st respondent that the Government has purchased the property as bought-in- land and a partition suit is intended to be filed to take possession of the 1/5th share. The 1 st respondent, however, has not taken a final decision on the representation of the petitioner.