Dismissed

Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd. v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Oct 2014WA/1472/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Reliance JIO Infocomm Ltd preferred a writ appeal challenging a single judge's order that dismissed their writ petition due to inordinate delay. The single judge had refused to exercise jurisdiction because the petitioner sought to challenge a Panchayat's refusal to grant a building permit. The High Court bench held it was inappropriate to interfere with the single judge's order regarding delay in

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal is dismissed with no relief granted.

Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd. Vs the State of Kerala — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN &

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BABU MATHEW P.JOSEPH

¶5

TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2014/29TH ASWINA, 1936

¶6

WA.No. 1472 of 2014 IN WP(C).25404/2014

¶7

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 25404/2014 DATED 30-09-2014

¶8

APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

¶9

RELIANCE JIO INFOCOMM LTD. CHANDRIKA CHAMBERS, 4TH FLOOR, S.A.ROAD VYTTILA, COCHIN-682019 REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE CONSTRUCTION HEAD AND AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY, MR.SHANKARAN BOSE AGED 49, S/O. K.SANKARAN.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.LAL K.JOSEPH

¶11

SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN SRI.V.S.SHIRAZ BAVA

¶12

SRI.JOSEPH KURIAN VALLAMATTAM

¶13

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENT:

¶14

THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF SELF GOVERNMENT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶15

THE PALLIKUNNU GRAMA PANCHAYATH PANCHAYATH OFFICE BUILDING, PALLIKUNNU, KANNUR-4 REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶16

THE SECRETARY PALLIKUNNU GRAMA PANCHAYATH PANCHAYATH OFFICE BUILDING, PALLIKUNNU, KANNUR-4.

¶17

R BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. GIRIJA GOPAL

¶18

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-102014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN &

¶20

BABU MATHEW P. JOSEPH, JJ.

¶21

============================== W.A.No. 1472 of 2014

¶22

============================== Dated this the 21^st day of October, 2014

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.

¶25

We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner. Learned single Judge has refused to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that the relief sought for in the writ petition is inordinately delayed. The writ petitioner wanted to challenge an order by which the building permit was rejected by the Panchayat Secretary on the ground that the Panchayat Committee had resolved not to grant any such permits within that Panchayat. There is a statutory remedy available by way of appeal against the decision of the Panchayat Secretary. Even if that decision

¶26

was to be challenged on ground of inherent lack of

¶27

WA 1472/2014

¶28

¶29

jurisdiction, the writ petitioner ought to have moved the writ court within a reasonable time. The learned single Judge was not persuaded to treat the writ petition as within time. It has been recorded in the impugned judgment that there is absolutely no explanation for the inordinate delay of nearly an year. We are of the view that the discretionary remedy having been refused by the learned single Judge on ground of delay, it would be inappropriate for us to interfere with that in an intra-court appeal under Section 5 of the

¶30

Kerala High Court Act. The writ appeal, therefore, fails.

¶31

In the result, this writ appeal is dismissed.

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN JUDGE

¶34

Sd/- BABU MATHEW P. JOSEPH JUDGE

ks.

True copy

P.S.To Judge

WA 1472/2014 3

Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd. v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd. 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

Geetha Senthil Kumar Vs Muhammed

Dr.J.Abraham Neyyarapalli Vs Balachandran K.K.

James Mathew Vs State of Kerala

Omana Mani Vs the Chief Manager (Authorised Officer Under Sarfaesi Act)

Dr.Shajikutty Vs State of Kerala

A.N.Thakanppan Alanal Vs the District Police Chief, Painavu, Idukki