Allowed

A.Abdul Manaf v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC6 Sept 2007OP/21545/2000

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition regarding stage carriage permits and non-renewals, the Kerala High Court disposed of the matter noting a concurrent interim order staying revenue recovery proceedings. The court directed that pending appeals would be heard within four months and the recovery proceedings shall not be enforced until such appeals are disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Direction that the impugned revenue recovery proceedings shall not be enforced till the disposal of the pending appeals.

A.Abdul Manaf Vs State of Kerala — Public Procurement and Tenders | Kerala HC (2007)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 6TH SEPTEMBER 2007 / 15TH BHADRA 1929

¶5

OP.No. 21545 of 2000(M)

¶6

----------------------------------

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

-------------------

¶9

ABDUL MANAF, S/O. MOIDEEN, MATTUMMAL, ATHAVANAD.P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, (THROUGH POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER P. BALAKRISHNA KURUP, S/O. CHANDU KURUP, TIRUR, NARUPATTA, VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.T.KRISHNAN UNNI.

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

------------------------

¶13

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, TRIVANDRUM.

¶14

2. SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, LABOUR DEPARTMENT, TRIVANDRUM.

¶15

3. DISTRICT EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KERALA MOTOR WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD, MALAPPURAM.

¶16

4. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM.

¶17

5. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY), TALUK OFFICE, TIRUR.

¶18

BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. T.B. RAMANI FOR R1,R2 R4 & R5, ADV. SRI. P. RAMAKRISHNAN FOR R3.

¶19

THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/09/2007,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

ORDER ON C.M.P. NO. 36198/2000 IN O.P. NO. 21545/2000-M

¶21

DISMISSED

¶22

06/09/2007.

¶23

SD/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE.

¶24

APPENDIX

¶25

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶26

EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE STAGE CARRIAGE PERMIT ISSUED IN THE NAME OF THE ASSIGNEE DTD. 25/04/1995.

¶27

EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 10/09/1999 IN EM 678/96-97.

¶28

EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 16/11/1999 IN EM 678/97-98.

¶29

EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 16/11/1999 IN EM 678/98-99.

¶30

EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED AGAINST EXHIBIT P.2. ORDER.

¶31

EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED AGAINST EXHIBIT P.3 ORDER.

¶32

EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED AGAINST EXHIBIT P.4. ORDER.

¶33

EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 15/07/2000 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FOR REALISATION OF THE AMOUNT COVERED BY EXT. P.2. ORDER.

¶34

EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 15/07/2000 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FOR THE REALISATION OF THE AMOUNT IN EXT.P.3. ORDER.

¶35

EXT.P.10: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 15/07/2000 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FOR THE REALISATION OF THE AMOUNT COVERED BY EXT.P.4. ORDER.

¶36

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL.

¶37

//TRUE COPY//

¶38

prv.

¶39

THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.

¶40

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

¶41

O.P.No.21545 of 2000-M

¶42

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

¶43

Dated this the 6^th day of September, 2007.

¶44

JUDGMENT

¶45

1.Learned Government Pleader takes notice for respondents 1, 2, 4 and 5. Adv.Sri.P.Ramakrishnan takes notice for the third respondent. Service complete.

¶46

2.There is an interim order on C.M.P.36198/2000, whereby revenue recovery proceedings stands stayed.

¶47

3.The limited plea of the petitioner is that revenue recoery proceedings shall not be enforced during the pendency of Exts.P5, P6 and P7 appeals.

¶48

4.Having heard counsel, this writ petition is disposed of in the wake of the aforesaid interim order, in the following

-: 2 :-

manner:

a)If Exts.P5, P6 and P7 appeals are still pending, they shall be considered in accordance with law by the second respondent within an outer limit of four months from today.

¶53

b)Following the aforesaid interim order on C.M.P.36198/2000, there will be a direction that the impugned revenue recovery proceedings shall not be enforced till the disposal of the appeals.

¶54

THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE.

Sha/-

-: 3 :-

THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.

¶59

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

¶60

O.P.No.21545 of 2000-M

¶61

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

¶62

JUDGMENT

¶63

Dated: 6^th September, 2007.

A.Abdul Manaf v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Abdul Manaf v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G.Pushparajan Vs State of Kerala

K.Ramachandran Nair Vs State of Kerala

P.M.Lakshmanan Vs Commissioner

Kamala Bai Vs Thedy.Tahsildar,Karungappally

Athura Seva Sangam Vs Dfo., Palakkad

Deepa Timbers Vs Union of India