Disposed

A.Prabhakaran v. the District Collector

Kerala HC3 Jun 2011WP(C)/7438/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of a writ petition seeking a housing fund benefit. The court directed the third respondent to reconsider the petitioner's application, including newly submitted documents, and finalize the benefit disbursement within two months.

What did the court decide?

Directed the third respondent to consider the matter including additional documents and disburse the benefit if eligible, finalising proceedings within two months.

A.Prabhakaran Vs the District Collector — Kerala HC (2011) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶3

FRIDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2011 / 13TH JYAISHTA 1933

¶4

WP(C).No. 7438 of 2011(D)

¶5

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

¶6

PETITIONER(S): ---------------

¶7

A.PRABHAKARAN, S/O. KOCHAYYAPPAN, PERINGALA, KAYAMKULAM VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.S.MOHANAN

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

¶11

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,COLLECTORATE,ALAPPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER,

¶12

HIGH COURT OF KERALA.

¶13

DISTRICT OFFICER, SCHEDULED CASTE DEVELOPMENT OFFICE, ALAPPUZHA.

¶14

SCHEDULED CASTE DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, KERALA SCHEDULED CASTE DEVELOPMENT OFFICE, MUTHUKULAM BLOCK, MUTHUKULAM.

¶15

BY SPL. GOVT. PLEADER ADV. MR. P. SANTHOSH KUMAR.

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶18

W.P.(C) No. 7438 OF 2011

¶19

......................................................................... Dated this the 3^rd June , 2011

¶20

J U D G M E N T

¶21

The prayer of the petitioner is to direct the respondents to consider and finalise the application of the petitioner for granting housing fund under the particular scheme of the Government, to extend the said benefit as payable to the poor people below the poverty line for construction of a residential house. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that, despite satisfying all the requirements by the petitioner, he has been made to run from pillar to post and hence this writ petition.

¶22

The learned Spl. Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits with reference to the instruction received that, actually an amount of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only) was disbursed to the petitioner during 1997-98 and the present proceedings are with reference to sanctioning of additional amount. It is also pointed out that the application preferred by the petitioner was defective for want of some other documents, which accordingly have been called for, as discernible

¶23

¶24

W.P.(C) No. 7438 OF 2011

¶25

from Ext.P15 notice dated 'nil', signed on 08.04.2011, ( produced by the petitioner along with I.A.No.8240 of 2011). The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has satisfied the requirements called for vide Ext. P15, as well.

¶26

In the above circumstance, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the 3^rd respondent to consider the matter in the light of all the records including the additional documents supplied by the petitioner, pursuant to Ext. P15 and pass appropriate orders, disbursing the benefit to the extent the petitioner is eligible. The proceedings shall be finalised, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition and copy of I.A.No. 8240 of 2011 before the 3^rd respondent for taking further steps.

¶27

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.

¶28

A.Prabhakaran v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Prabhakaran v. the District Collector

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

Renjusha.J. Vs Sri.Prakash Babu

P.Raveendran Vs Addl.District Magistrate,Kannur

M.P.Varghese Vs Dist.Collector

Modular Concepts Electromechanical Llc Vs State of Kerala

Jijeesh Vs Plantation Corporation of Kerala Ltd.

Chandrika Vs Union of India