Judgment :- 1. These writ applications arise out of attempts made to collect, what is called 'basic tax' in the Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to 'the Act') from the petitioners. Various contentions have been raised in these writ applications. But we consider it unnecessary to deal with all those questions because we feel that the cases can be disposed of on the basis of non-compliance with two sections of the Act. 2. By S.5 which is the charging section, a tax called 'basic tax' on all lands, of whatever description and held under whatever tenure situate in the areas mentioned in that section has been imposed on the landholder of that land. The rate of tax is specified under S.6 the relevant sub-sections of which omitting the provisos and the explanations read as follows: "Rate of basic tax (1) The basic tax charged and levied under S.5 shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section (2) and S.7, be at the rate of two rupees per acre per annum. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), where a landholder or other person liable to pay basic tax proves to the satisfaction of the prescribed authority that the gross income from any land was less than ten rupees per acre per annum, the basic tax payable on such land shall be at a rate fixed by the prescribed authority calculated at one-fifth of the gross income from such land. (3) An application for fixation of the rate of basic tax under sub-section (2) shall be in the form specified by the Government by notification in the Gazette and shall be made to the prescribed authority within four months from the date of publication of this Act in the Gazette." 3. In regard to unsurveyed lands, there is a specific provision, S.7 which runs thus: "Provisional assessment of basic tax in the case of unsurveyed lands. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in S.6, in the case of lands which have not been surveyed, the prescribed authority may make a provisional assessment of the basic tax payable on such lands. For the purpose of making the provisional assessment the prescribed authority shall by notice, call upon the landholder concerned and any other person in possession of the lands to furnish such particulars relating to the lands as the prescribed authority considers necessary within such time as may be specified in the notice. For the purpose of making the provisional assessment the prescribed authority shall by notice, call upon the landholder concerned and any other person in possession of the lands to furnish such particulars relating to the lands as the prescribed authority considers necessary within such time as may be specified in the notice. (2) If the prescribed authority is satisfied that the particulars furnished by the landholder or other person are correct and complete he shall make a provisional assessment of the basic tax payable on such lands at the rate specified in sub-section (1) or Sub-section (2) of S.6, as the case may be on the basis of the particulars so furnished. (3) If the particulars called for under sub-section (1) are not furnished within the time specified therefor or if the particulars furnished appear to the prescribed authority to be incorrect or incomplete, the prescribed authority may make a provisional assessment of the basic tax payable on such lands at the rate specified in sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of S.6, as the case may be, to the best of his judgment: Provided that before making a provisional assessment under this sub-section the landholder concerned and any other person liable to pay the tax under the provisional assessment shall be given an opportunity to show cause against the proposed assessment. (4) The order of the prescribed authority under sub-section (3) shall be communicated to the land-holder concerned and any other person liable to pay the provisional assessment. (5) The amount of the tax under the provisional assessment fixed under this section shall be recoverable in the same manner as the basic tax. (6) The Government shall, as soon as may be, and in any case before the expiry of a period of five years from the date of publication of this Act in the Gazette, cause a survey to be conducted of the unsurveyed lands, and thereupon the prescribed authority shall make a regular assessment of the basic tax payable in respect of such lands. The provisions of S.6 shall apply to such regular assessment provided that the time for making application for the fixation of the rate of basic tax under sub-section (2) of S.6 shall be four months from the date of completion of the survey of the lands. The provisions of S.6 shall apply to such regular assessment provided that the time for making application for the fixation of the rate of basic tax under sub-section (2) of S.6 shall be four months from the date of completion of the survey of the lands. After a regular assessment has been made under S.6 any amount paid towards the provisional assessment shall be deemed to have been paid towards the regular assessment and, where the amount paid towards the provisional assessment exceeds the amount payable under the regular assessment, the excess shall be refunded to the person entitled thereto." 4. We do not think we should read the further provisions in the statute as we propose to dispose of these cases on the provisions contained in these sections. 5. The writ applicants are all admittedly land-holders. One of the contentions raised by some of the petitioners is that their lands do not yield more than Rs. 10/-a year and therefore any assessment on them can only be by applying the provision in sub-section 2 of S.6 of the Act which we have read. And the main contention of such of the petitioners who are landholders of unsurveyed lands is that there is no provisional assessment as envisaged by S.7 of the Act, that no order provisionally assessing them to land tax has been communicated to them, that the opportunity that should be given according to the provisions of that section before any provisional assessment is made has not been given to them and that there is not even a notice issued to them before any provisional orders were made. 6. To understand the contentions it will be useful to refer to the history of the attempts made by the State to collect the basic tax. First this was attempted by the passing of the Travancore-Cochin Land Tax Act, 1955. This Act was declared by the Supreme Court to be unconstitutional (AIR. 1961 S. C. 552). After that Ordinance 2 of 1961 (the Kerala Land Tax Ordinance, 1961) was passed which was replaced by the Act. The Act was impugned before this Court and this Court declared the Act unconstitutional by its decision in Padmanabha Ravi Varma Raja v. Dy. Tahsildar, Chittur reported in 1963 KLT.15. This was on 1110 1962 and for nearly two years thereafter no attempt was made to collect the tax, for, there was no statute. The Act was impugned before this Court and this Court declared the Act unconstitutional by its decision in Padmanabha Ravi Varma Raja v. Dy. Tahsildar, Chittur reported in 1963 KLT.15. This was on 1110 1962 and for nearly two years thereafter no attempt was made to collect the tax, for, there was no statute. Then on 20 61964, the Act was included in the 9th Schedule to the Constitution, by an amendment to the Constitution, the 17th amendment, and thereafter attempts to collect the tax have been revived. 7. During the course of nearly a decade, on and off, attempts have been made and persons similar to the petitioners have been striving, to have the law under which it was done declared unconstitutional. It is in the light of these that we have to consider the contention that is raised, based on sub-section 3 of S.6 that applications should be made within four months from the date of publication of the Act for deciding the question arising for determination under sub-section 2 of S.6 and that it was not possible to do so. It is pointed out that the Act was published in the Gazette on the 30th of March, 1961, and that the period for making applications had expired on the 30th of July, 1961, and no applications were made within that time for, the Act itself was impugned and that, successfully. Thereafter the Ordinance came in, followed by the Act which was struck down by this Court on 1110 1962. No attempts were therefore made to make any applications under the statute either, for the result of the pronouncement of this Court was that there was no statute under which any tax could be collected. This state of affairs continued till the Act was included in the 9th schedule. 8. The learned Advocate General has brought to our notice a form prescribed for the application under S.6(2) of the Act and also brought to our notice the fact that there has been a prescribed authority, the authority being prescribed under Ordinance 2 of 1961. This state of affairs continued till the Act was included in the 9th schedule. 8. The learned Advocate General has brought to our notice a form prescribed for the application under S.6(2) of the Act and also brought to our notice the fact that there has been a prescribed authority, the authority being prescribed under Ordinance 2 of 1961. But we consider that in the light of the history which we have referred to, there should be a prescription of the authority under the Act, for, though the Act had come into operation from 1955 from the date on which the Travancore-Cochin Land Tax Act, 1955 came into operation by virtue of the provisions in the Act, the Act really, if at all, had become operative only from 20 61964 and so the petitioner did not get a chance of making use of the provisions in sub-sections 2 and 3 of S.6. 9. We therefore direct that the authority to function for the purpose of S.6 will be prescribed afresh and the form in which the application should be made for the purpose of S.6 should also be prescribed under the Act. 10. In order to give relief to the petitioners and in order that, the question as to their exact liability may be determined it is also necessary that the time provided by S.6 (3) should be altered. This should be so altered as to give the petitioners at least four months' time from the date of the prescription of the authority and the form. We are assured by the learned Advocate General that the question will be examined and amendments if necessary, will be effected. 11. Since the question of the actual liabilities of such of the petitioners who have a case that the incomes from their property do not exceed Rs.10/-a year have not been determined yet, we direct that till such questions are determined pursuant to applications made by the petitioners after the prescription of the formal authority under this Act, no attempt will be made to collect any tax from them pursuant to the provisions of the Act. 12. 12. Regarding the other category, that is, such of the petitioners who own unsurveyed land to which S.7 is attracted, we direct that there should be provisional orders of assessment passed in compliance with S.7 which will be communicated to the petitioners and it is only after the communication of such orders that the Act will be applied to them. 13. These writ applications are disposed of on the above terms. There will be no direction regarding costs.