Disposed

Chandrasekharan Nair v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Jun 2012WP(C)/2599/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition by directing ex-servicemen to apply for tax exemption benefits. Pending the Panchayat's decision, criminal proceedings for non-payment were stayed. The court expressly reserved its opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to apply for tax exemption within two weeks; Panchayat to decide within four weeks; criminal proceedings stayed; merits left open.

Chandrasekharan Nair Vs the State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE 2012/18TH JYAISHTA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 2599 of 2012 (Y)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

1. CHANDRASEKHARAN NAIR, HARI BHAVANAM, CLAPPANA P.O.,

¶8

KOLLAM-690 525.

¶9

2. PURUSHAN,MAMOOTTIL MANI NIVAS, CLAPPANA P.O., KOLLAM-690 525.

¶10

3. YUNUSKUTTY, VALIYATHARA PADEETTATHIL, KADATHUR,

¶11

K.S.PURAM P.O., KOLLAM -690 542.

¶12

4. PRASANNAN, ACHATHU THARAYIL, ADINADU SOUTH,

¶13

KATTILKADAVU P.O., KOLLAM-690 542.

¶14

5. T.R.SUSEELAN, NARAYANEEYAM, ADINADU SOUTH,

¶15

KATTILKADAVU P.O., KOLLAM-690 542.

¶16

6. ACHUTHAN, PRADEEP NIVAS, NEELIKULAM, K.S.PURAM P.O., KOLLAM-690 542.

¶17

BY ADVS.SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN SRI.T.S.HARIKUMAR SRI.K.JAGADEESH

¶18

RESPONDENT(S):

¶19

1. THE STATE OF KERALA,

¶20

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,

¶21

DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶22

2. THE DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYAT,

¶23

PANCHAYATH DIRECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

..2/-

Kss

..2....

WPC.NO.2599/2012 Y

¶28

3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYAT, KOLLAM-690 013.

¶29

4. THE SECRETARY, KULASEKHARAPURAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, ADINADU NORTH P.O., KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM-690 542.

¶30

R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI,MUHAMMED SHAFI R4 BY ADV. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM) SRI.ANOOP.V.NAIR

¶31

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-06-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶32

kSS

¶33

WPC.NO.2599/2012 Y

¶34

APPENDIX

¶35

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶36

EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER VIDE NO.G.O.(MS) 3/2005/L.S.G.D., DT.1-1-2005.

¶37

EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT VIDE NO.G.O.(MS)/111/2005/LSGD DT.23-4-2005.

¶38

EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.G.O.(MS)212/08/LSGD. DT.25-7-2008.

¶39

EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT NO.G.O.(MS) NO.171/09/LSGD, DT.29-8-2009.

¶40

EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.G.O.(MS)NO.1761/2010/LSGD, DT.27-5-2010.

¶41

EXHIBIT P6: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DT.1-4-2011.

¶42

EXHIBIT P7: TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY GIVEN BY PANCHAYATH ASSISTANT DIRECTOR ADDRESSED TO K.MOHANAN PILLAI, DT.23-7-2011.

¶43

EXHIBIT P8: TRUE COPY OF THE SUMMONS ISSUED TO PETITIONERS.

¶44

EXHIBIT P9: CERTIFIED COPY OF THE COMPLAINT WITH RESPECT TO THE 6TH PETITIONER FILED BY THE4TH RESPONDENT.

¶45

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: N I L

/TRUE COPY/

P.S.TO JUDGE

Kss

ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

¶50

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

¶51

W.P.(C) NO.2599 OF 2012(Y)

¶52

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

¶53

Dated this the 8^th day of June, 2012

¶54

J U D G M E N T

¶55

Petitioners are ex servicemen. By virtue of Exts.P1 to P5 exservicemen are entitled to get exemption from payment of building tax. According to the petitioners, they are enjoying the benefits from 2005 onwards. However, all on a sudden they received Ext.P8 series of summons from the Frist Class Judicial Magistrate Court, Karunagapally in prosecutions launched by the Panchayat for nonpayment of building tax. Contending that in view of the Government Orders they are exempted from payment and therefore the prosecution is illegal, the petitioners have filed this writ petition for appropriate reliefs.

¶56

Considering the nature of the contentions this court passed order dated 5.3.2012 staying further proceedings in the criminal cases against the petitioners.

¶57

It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioners and the counsel for the 4^th respondent that during the pendency of the writ petition, the issue was discussed between the petitioners and the

¶58

WPC.No. 2599/2012

¶59

:2 :

¶60

committee of the Panchayat and it has been agreed that on the petitioners filing applications for the benefit of Exts.P1 to P5, the Panchayat will consider their eligibility and pass orders in the matter. It is submitted that this course of action is agreeable to the petitioners.

¶61

Accordingly I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions.

¶62

i. Petitioners shall submit applications to the 4^th respondent claiming the benefit of Exts.P1 to P5 Government Orders. This they shall do at any rate within 2 weeks from today.

¶63

ii. If the applications are filed as above, the Panchayat will consider the same and pass orders thereon, at any rate within 4 weeks thereafter.

¶64

Iii. Subject to the filing of the application as above, it is ordered that further proceedings in the criminal cases in which Ext.P8 series of summons are issued, will stand stayed until orders are passed as above. It is directed that if the final order that is passed by the Panchayat is one exempting the petitioners from liability, necessary action will be taken by the 4^th respondent for withdrawing the prosecution also.

¶65

WPC.No. 2599/2012

¶66

:3 :

¶67

It is clarified that this court has not expressed anything on the

¶68

merits and the contentions of both the parties are left open.

(ANTONY DOMINIC)

JUDGE

WPC.No. 2599/2012

¶73

:4 :

Chandrasekharan Nair v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandrasekharan Nair v. the 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

K.P.Henry Vs the Corporation of Kochi

Ajith Kumar Vs the Mavelikkara Municipality

Vijayan.E. Vs Kulathoor Grama Panchayat

Kalloorkad Grama Panchayath Vs M/S. Kalloorkad Merchants Association

Raveendran Pillai Vs West Kallada Grama Panchayath

Kairali Residents Association Vs the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institution