The petitioner Corporation was entrusted with the management of plantations by the State Government. By a Government Order G.O. (MS).No.33/2000/F&WLD dated 1.6.2000, three plantations namely Pampra, Cheeyembam and Kallumala in Wayanad District were transferred to the petitioner Corporation for the purposes of management. The said estates comprised of a total area of 477 hectares that was cultivated with coffee, pepper and cardamom. By Ext.P2 notification dated 12.10.2004, the State Government declared these plantations as listed for distribution to landless Adivasis of Wayanad District. Accordingly, there was large scale encroachment into the said plantations and, consequently, the petitioner could not continue the effective management of the said plantations and its collection of yield from the said plantations also suffered considerably. The petitioner Corporation, therefore, requested the State Government to either evict the encroachers or to take back the plantations entrusted to them. While so, the 1st respondent demanded plantation tax in respect of the lands held by the petitioner Corporation. The said lands included even the extent of 477 hectares, covered by the three plantations referred to above. The provisional assessment in respect of the plantations for the assessment years 2002-03 to 2007-08 was completed by fixing the tax due at Rs.6,70,125/-. This was later confirmed by Ext.P6 order dated 18.10.2007. On receipt of Ext.P6 order, the petitioner effected payment of the first instalment of Rs.3,50,000/- and requested the respondents for a deduction of Rs.97,181/- towards plantation tax that was attributable to the encroached plantations. The request of the petitioner was gone into by the 2nd respondent, who, after conducting an enquiry, recommended an exemption from plantation tax in respect of the areas that were encroached and consequently recommended the remission of tax to the extent of Rs.97,184/-. Noting the said recommendation, the petitioner paid the balance amount of plantation tax that was demanded from it for the period from 2002-03 to 2007-08 after deducting the aforesaid amount of Rs.97,184/-. The 1st respondent, however, without considering the recommendation of the 2nd respondent, initiated revenue recovery proceedings for recovery of the said amount of Rs.97,184/-. The facts would disclose that for the assessment year 2008-09, an amount of Rs.75,882/- was deducted by the petitioner toward tax payable in respect of the encroached plantations and this amount also came to be demanded by the 1st respondent through steps initiated under the Revenue Recovery Act. Thus, recovery steps were initiated against the petitioner for realisation of a total of Rs.3,81,502/- in respect of the assessment years 2002-03 to 2008-09. Faced with that demand, the petitioner approached the Revenue Minister through Ext.P14 representation dated 19.5.2010 but the same did not yield any positive response. It is under these circumstances that the petitioner approached this Court challenging Exts.P6, P10, P11 and P12 and seeking a declaration that the petitioner Corporation is not liable to pay plantation tax for 477 hectares of land situated at Pampra, Cheeyembam and Kallumala in Wayanad District. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 1st respondent wherein the total amounts that are due from the petitioner Corporation are indicated. In the counter affidavit, an additional amount of Rs.2,08,439/- is shown as the liability for the assessment year 2009-10, which, when taken into account tallies with the amount of Rs.3,81,502/- shown in the revenue recovery notices issued to the petitioner in respect of the assessment years from 2002-03 to 2009-
10. It is pointed out that, although the petitioner Corporation would contend that they are no longer in possession of the three plantations referred to above, they have submitted signed returns in which the possession and yield from these lands are also clearly shown. The recourse to revenue recovery proceedings is sought to be justified on the ground that the petitioner has not obtained any order from the State of Kerala exempting it from the requirement of paying tax under the Kerala Plantations Tax Act, 1960, hereinafter referred to as the 'Act', and hence, there was no ground for impugning the recovery action initiated by the respondents.
3. I have heard Sri.V.G.Arun, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as also Sri.Liju V. Stephen, the learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents.
4. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the Bar, I find that, considering the representation of the petitioner Corporation, the 2nd respondent had conducted an enquiry with a view to ascertain the correctness of the submissions made by the petitioner Corporation regarding encroachment into lands that were entrusted to them by the State of Kerala. Pursuant to the enquiry conducted by the 2nd respondent, he had recommended the case of the petitioner for the grant of exemption from payment of plantation tax in respect of the lands that were encroached. The power to grant an exemption from the provisions of the Act is available only to the State Government in view of Section 31A of the Act. Similarly, the power under Section 28 of the Act to remit in whole or in part, the amount of plantation tax payable by any person on being satisfied that it is necessary to do so on account of failure or destruction of crops or on account of the fact that the yield in any plantation had been substantially reduced due to natural causes, is also one that is available only to the State Government. In the instant case, considering the fact that it is the State Government that issued Ext.P4 notification, declaring the aforementioned three plantations as listed for distribution to landless Adivasies, and as a consequence of it, the said lands were encroached into, it is for the State Government to take a decision with regard to the insistence, by the authorities under the Act, on the petitioner Corporation discharging plantation tax dues in respect of the aforesaid three plantations. Although there has been a recommendation in favour of the petitioner by the 2nd respondent, no steps have been taken by the 4th respondent, in terms of the Act, to exempt the petitioner from its liability to pay plantation tax for the three plantations referred to above. Insofar as the petitioner has already discharged its liability under the Act in respect of the areas that are admittedly in its possession and further, it has already paid an amount of Rs.1,36,479/- from out of the demand of Rs.3,81,502/- made on it in respect of the three estates referred to above, I am of the view that the recovery proceedings initiated against the petitioner for the plantation tax dues in respect of the three plantations referred to above can be kept in abeyance pending a consideration by the 4th respondent of the claim for exemption made by the petitioner Corporation. Accordingly,, I direct the 4th respondent to take a decision on the request for exemption made by the petitioner Corporation, taking into account Ext.P9 recommendation by the 2nd respondent, and after hearing the petitioner. The 4th respondent shall pass orders on the claim made by the petitioner corporation within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The recovery proceedings initiated against the petitioner, that have been stayed by this Court in the present writ petition, shall be kept in abeyance till such time as the 4th respondent takes a decision in the matter as directed above and communicates the order passed to the petitioner Corporation.
With these directions, the writ petition is disposed.
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE prp