Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Jaganadhan Vs State of Kerala (Kerala High Court)
Appeal Number : WP(C) No. 5449 of 2019
Date of Judgement/Order : 05/04/2022
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Jaganadhan Vs State of Kerala (Kerala High Court)

Facts- The Government of Kerala amended the Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 by introducing Section 27A, whereby applications for user of unnotified land for other purposes was permitted. A fee was prescribed for granting permission for such user.

On 25.7.2021, the Government issued a Circular whereby a cut off date was fixed for applications seeking permissions for user of unnotified lands for other purposes. The Circular was challenged before this Court and a Division Bench of this Court in its judgment in Baby v. District Collector [2021 (6) KLT 316] held that the Circular was unconstitutional. This Court held that when the State Government intended to classify and exclude farmers holding upto 25 cents of unnotified paddy land from payment of fee/charge for utilisation of the same for other purposes, there cannot be a further reclassification based on date of submission of the application. The petitioners are all persons from whom fee has been collected which they are otherwise not liable to pay, solely based on the Circular which has been held to be unconstitutional. In W.P.(C)No.5449 of 2019, the petitioner paid the amount based on interim order issued by this Court on 4.4.2019 wherein this Court had clearly stated that if the petitioner ultimately succeeds in the writ petition, he will be entitled to refund of the amount. The petitioners in all these cases claim refund of the amounts which have been collected from them illegally based on the Circular which has been held to be unconstitutional.

Conclusion- The issue whether the claim for refund of amounts which have been collected based on the unconstitutional levy either in the form of fee or in the form of tax or in the form of duty is no longer res integra. In a series of decisions, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the person from whom such amount is collected is entitled to refund of the amount whether the claim is made in a suit or whether it is made in an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KERALA HIGH COURT

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031