Writ petition challenging interim order resuming allotted industrial land. Court quashed the order relying on Advocate Commissioner's report verifying unit functionality.
Ext.P12 interim order resuming petitioner's allotted land is quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE
TUESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE 2014/20TH JYAISHTA, 1936
WP(C).No. 1094 of 2010 (J)
PETITIONER:
E.J.JOHN, EDAVAMVELIL HOUSE T.P.N.3/8, TALAP, KANNUR - 670002.
BY ADV. SRI.S.RAMESH BABU
RESPONDENTS:
1. KERALA SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., POST BOX NO.50, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001
2. THE SENIOR MANAGER (IE) I/C
R1-R2 BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP BY ADV. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN,(ADV.COMMISSIONER) BY SRI.R.T.PRADEEP, SC FOR R1 & R2
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10-06-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WPC NO. 1094/2010
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
WPC NO. 1094/2010
-2-
P14(h) COPY OF THE ELECTRICITY BILL FOR THE PERIOD AUGUST, 2009
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS
| ANNEXURE R1a | COPY OF REPORT OF VIGILANCE & ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU |
|---|---|
| ANNEXURE R1b | COPYOF COMMUNICATION DATED 18.06.2009 |
| ANNEXURE R1c | COPY OF COMMUNICATION DATED 29.09.2009 FROM GOVERNMENT TO SIDCO |
// TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE
SD
A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J.
W.P.C.No.1094 OF 2010
Dated this the 10th June, 2014
Petitioner challenges Ext.P12 order resuming his land having an extent of 7 cents, which was allotted in his favour as per Ext.P1 in the year 1993. Show cause notice was issued to him in terms of Ext.P7 on 24.10.2009, inter alia, stating that the land was kept idle and no activity has been done in respect of land in terms with the allotment and therefore, the petitioner was called upon to show cause why the allotment should not be cancelled. Pursuant to the same, after hearing the petitioner, Ext.P12 order came to be passed.
2
W.P.C.No.1094 OF 2010
In the result, this writ petition is allowed and Ext.P12 is
hereby quashed.
Sd/-
A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE
sd
// TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an order dismissing land allotment based on vigilance report is sustainable when an Advocate Commissioner report confirms the unit was functioning.
Whether Ext.P12 resume order has any basis when facts are established by Commissioner's report.
E.J. John
Kerala Small Industries Development Corporation Ltd.
The Senior Manager (IE) I/C Kerala Small Industries Development Corporation Ltd.
A.M. Shaifque
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
