Allowed

Chandra Silk Handloom Weavers Industrial v. Director of Handlooms & Textiles

Kerala HC5 Nov 2013WP(C)/8495/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the petitioner Society's writ petition regarding denied financial assistance. The Court directed the respondents to reconsider the petitioner's case in light of a specific previous judgment within three months.

What did the court decide?

Directions to respondents to reconsider the petitioner's case within three months in light of OP No.23210/1998.

Chandra Silk Handloom Weavers Industrial Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2013/14TH KARTHIKA, 1935

¶5

WP(C).No. 8495 of 2005 (J)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

CHANDRA SILK HANDLOOM WEAVERS INDUSTRIAL (P & S) CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. NO.SL.IND (T) 594, OORUTTAMBALAM P.O., REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.D.SOMASUNDARAM

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. DIRECTOR OF HANDLOOMS AND TEXTILES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶11

2. GENERAL MANAGER,

¶12

DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶13

BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SAREENA

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05-11-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

sts

¶16

WP(C)NO.8495/2005

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶19

P1 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER DATED 15/6/95

¶20

P2 COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER IN THE FORM OF LETTER DATED 20/7/1996 ISSUED BY THE JOINTS SECRETARY TO GOVT. TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT

¶21

P3 COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 16/8/1999 IN CMP 29562/99 IN O.P.NO.7747/98

¶22

P4 COPY OF THE RESOLUTION PASSED BY THE COMMITTEE

¶23

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO.JUDGE

sts

A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J.

¶28

W.P.(C) No. 8495 of 2005

¶29

Dated this the 5^th day of November, 2013

¶30

J U D G M E N T

¶31

The petitioner, which is a Handloom Society registered in the year 1995, has come up before this Court aggrieved by the denial of financial assistance to the petitioner Society by the respondents.

¶32

The petitioner Society has installed handlooms and requested for approval of the same. The Central and State Governments had evolved several schemes for providing financial assistance to the Handloom Societies in the State. According to the petitioner Society, those benefits were not given to the petitioner for the reason that it was registered in the period, during which there was a ban imposed by the Government for providing financial assistance to the Handloom Societies in Thiruvananthapuram District till enquiry by the Finance (Inspection Wing) Department is over.

¶33

W.P.(C) No. 8495 of 2005

¶34

..2..

¶35

The Government Order relied on by the petitioner is Ext.P2. According to the petitioner, Ext.P2 is quashed by this Court in OP No.23210/1998. A copy of the said decision was made available to me for perusal during the course of argument by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Therefore, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner's request has to be reconsidered by the Government in the light of the aforesaid decision. As the request of the petitioner is genuine, this Court feels that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the respondents to reconsider the case of the petitioner in the light of the aforesaid judgment.

¶36

In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to reconsider the case of the petitioner in the light of the decision of this Court in OP No.23210/1998. The entire exercise shall be completed by the respondents within a period of three months from today. To avoid delay, the petitioner shall be at liberty to

¶37

W.P.(C) No. 8495 of 2005

¶38

..3..

¶39

produce a copy of this writ petition and a copy of this judgment as well as a copy of the judgment in OP No.23210/1998 before the respondents within a period of one month from today.

¶40

Sd/- A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, JUDGE

¶41

bka/-

Chandra Silk Handloom Weavers Industrial v. Director of Handlooms & Textiles

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandra Silk Handloom Weavers Industrial v. Director of Handlooms & Textiles

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

Dr.Bindu A.K. Vs State of Kerala

N.Krishna Holla Vs Secretary, Rta, Kasargod.

Sreekanth G. Vs Headmistress, C.a.High School, Peruvamba

K.Thankamani Vs Union of India

Mohanan T. Vs Joint Registrar (General), Primary Co-Op

Sunil Kumar Vs State of Kerala