Disposed

K.P.Anil Kumar v. the District Collector

Kerala HC15 Nov 2013WP(C)/19895/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of two linked writ petitions concerning land mutation and waiver of penal interest. Relying on a statement of dues and eligibility for the One Time Settlement Scheme, the Court directed respondents to finalize the petitioner's application for benefit within one month.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to consider the petitioner's application for One Time Settlement Scheme benefit and inform the position within one month.

K.P.Anil Kumar Vs the District Collector — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2013/24TH KARTHIKA, 1935

¶5

WP(C).No. 19895 of 2013 (J)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

K.P. ANIL KUMAR, S/O.PARAMESWARAN PILLAI,AGED 44, KAVIL VEEDU, THURUTHIKKARA, KUNNATHUR, KOLLAM-690 540.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN SMT.GEETHA P.MENON SRI.N.AJITH SRI.P.M.NEELAKANDAN SRI.P.B.SUBRAMANYAN

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM-691 001.

¶11

2. THE TAHSILDAR,KUNNATHUR TALUK,

¶12

SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM-690 521.

¶13

3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,

¶14

SOORAYAND NORTH, KOLLAM-690 522.

¶15

4. KERALA KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶16

5. SOORANAD GRAMA VIKASANA SOCIETY (Q-4696),

¶17

REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT K.G.DEVAKI AMMA,

¶18

SOORANAD NORTH, KOLLAM-690 522.

¶19

R1 TO R3 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. JOSEPH GEORGE R4 BY SRI.TOM K.THOMAS, SC

¶20

SRI.R.S.HARI KUMAR ,SC

¶21

R5 BY ADV. SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15-11-2013,ALONG WITH WP(C)NO.26169 OF 2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

sts

¶24

WP(C).No. 19895 of 2013 (J)

¶25

APPENDIX

¶26

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶27

P1: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN OP(C)NO.115 OF 2011 DATED 27.9.2012.

¶28

P2: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.R9-17190/08 BY RESPONDENT NO.1, DATED 25.1.2013.

¶29

P3: COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 WITH BANKE'S CHEQUE, DATED 28.2.2013.

¶30

P4: COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.363/13 S.R.O., SOORANAD DATED 7.3.2013.

¶31

P5: COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT NO.1 DATED 13.3.2013.

¶32

P6: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WPC.NO.7583 OF 2013, DATED 5/4/2013

¶33

P7: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B2-10714/06 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 DATED 6.7.2013.

¶34

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO.JUDGE

sts

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.

¶39

¶40

W.P.(C) Nos. 19895 and

¶41

26169 of 2013

¶42

¶43

Dated, this the 15^th day of November, 2013

¶44

JUDGMENT

¶45

The petitioners in these cases [W.P.(C) Nos. 26160 and 19895

¶46

of 2013] are mother and son respectively. The prayers in W.P.(C) No. 19895 of 2013 are in the following terms :

¶47

“i. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order quashing Ext. P7

¶48

ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing Respondent No. 2 to effect mutation of the property covered by Ext. P4 sale deed as requested in Ext. P5 forthwith.

¶49

iii. Grant the petitioner such other appropriate reliefs that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper.

¶50

iv. Grant such other interim reliefs that petitioner prays from time to time; AND

¶51

v. Award the petitioner the costs of this writ petition.

¶52

The prayers raised in W.P.(C) No. 26169 of 2013 are as given below:

¶53

i. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 2^nd respondent to waive the penal interest as well as reduce the interest

¶54

W.P.(C) Nos. 19895 and 26169 of 2013.

¶55

: 2 :

¶56

substantially, thereby maintaining principal amount, above the interest.

¶57

ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 3^rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext. P8 representation expeditiously and within a time limit to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

¶58

And

¶59

iii. Grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of this case including the cost of this writ petition.

¶60

When the matters were came up for consideration on

¶61

01.01.2013, the following interim order was passed :

¶62

“The learned standing counsel appearing for the Kerala Khadi & Village Industries Board submits that the issues involved in both these writ petitions are closely interlinked and that the same was settled by virtue of the proceedings dated 09.08.2012, produced as part of Ext. P1 in W.P.(C) No. 19895 of 2013. It is stated that, the parties have not honoured the commitment with regard to the settlement arrived at, and is without satisfying the demand of the Board that the property has already been transferred by the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 26169 of 2013 to the petitioner in the other case, in respect of which the

¶63

W.P.(C) Nos. 19895 and 26169 of 2013.

¶64

: 3 :

¶65

mutation is sought to be effected by the petitioner in W.P. (C) No. 19895 of 2013.

¶66

The learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 26169/2013 submit that the petitioner therein and the petitioner in the other case (who is the son of the petitioner in the former case) are ready to have the entire liability settled (which is confirmed by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in the latter case as well) and that that the hurdle is because of the obscurity with regard to the final figures.

¶67

In the said circumstance, the Board is directed to file a statement before this Court as to the actual amount due from the concerned parties.

¶68

Post on 08.11.2013 for further consideration.

¶69

Pursuant to the above order, a statement dated 06.11.2013 [in W.P.(C) No. 26169 of 2013] came to be filed on behalf of the second respondent as to the factual particulars, giving split up figures of the amount due. It is stated that an amount of Rs.36,55,128/- is due from the petitioner. However referring to One Time Settlement Scheme, it is pointed out that, if the parties are eligible for the same, the final figures will be Rs.30,34,875/-. It is specifically stated in paragraph 3 of the said statement that the petitioner had already submitted an application for the benefit

¶70

W.P.(C) Nos. 19895 and 26169 of 2013.

¶71

: 4 :

¶72

under the One Time Settlement Scheme on 05.11.2013 and if the petitioner is found eligible, there will be a total waiver of the penal interest and such other benefits, including conversion of margin money to non-repayable grant. The learned standing counsel submits that the proceedings in this regard will be finalized, at the earliest, at any rate within one month. The said submission is recorded.

¶73

In the said circumstances, both the writ petitions are disposed of, making the interim order absolute and directing the respondents to consider the application preferred by the petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 26169 of 2013, for availing the benefit of OTS, vide application dated 05.11.2013, at the earliest, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The position shall be let known to the petitioner immediately thereafter and it will be open for the petitioner to satisfy entire amount on the basis of the submission and undertaking given before this Court.

¶74

Sd/-

¶75

P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE)

¶76

kmd

K.P.Anil Kumar v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.P.Anil Kumar 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

Sainaba Vs State of Kerala

Usha Perinkatath Vs Tahasildar, Thalassery Taluk

T.R.Sivasankaran Vs the Banking Ombudsman

Chandy Joseph Vs the Chief Conservator of Forests

K.v.Kurien Vs the Tahsildar

C.K.Rajan Vs State of Kerala