Dismissed

P.a.Jose v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC24 Mar 2015WP(C)/5665/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed the writ petition challenging an order refusing land utilization permission. It held that the petitioners have an alternative remedy via appeal and revision under the Kerala Land Utilization Order. Interference was declined, and the petitioners were directed to approach the appellate authority.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed; the petitioners were directed to approach the appellate authority under the Kerala Land Utilization Order.

P.a.Jose Vs State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/3RD CHAITHRA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 5665 of 2015 (G)

¶6

PETITIONER(S) :

¶7

1. P.A.JOSE JOS GOLD TRADERS AND JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED NO.19/XII, KALAREEKAL BAZAR, KOTTAYAM.

¶8

2. P.A.JOSE

¶9

JOSCO BULLION TRADERS AND JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED NO.X/894, 895, K.K.ROAD CENTRAL JUNCTION, KOTTAYAM,

¶10

PIN - 686001.

¶11

BY ADVS.SMT.K.P.SANTHI

¶12

SRI.R.JAYAKRISHNAN (MUTHUKULAM) SMT.E.U.DHANYA SRI.RILGIN V.GEORGE

¶13

RESPONDENT(S) :

¶14

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,

¶15

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶16

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR-680 001.

¶17

3. THE TAHSILDAR THRISSUR-680 001.

¶18

4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER AYYANTHOLE-680 121.

¶19

R1 TO R4 BY SR.GOVT. PLEADER SRI. JOSEPH GEORGE

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

¶22

...2/-

¶23

WP(C).No. 5665 of 2015 (G)

¶24

APPENDIX

¶25

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :

¶26

EXHIBIT-P1: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 1.1.2014 SUBMITTED TO RESPONDENTS 2 TO 4.

¶27

EXHIBIT-P2: TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE DRAFT DATA BANK.

¶28

EXHIBIT-P3: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP.(C) NO.9037 OF 2014.

¶29

EXHIBIT-P4: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 2.1.2015 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶30

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.

JUDGMENT

The grievance of the petitioners is with regard to Ext. P4 order dated 02.01.2015 passed by the second respondent herein turning down the request to grant permission to the petitioners under Clause 6 (2) of the Kerala Land Utilization Order, so as to make use of the property for other purpose than agriculture.

¶39

Heard the learned Government Pleader as well, who submits that if the petitioners are aggrieved of Ext. P4 order passed under Clause 6 (2) of the KLU Order the petitioners are having remedy by way of appeal as provided under Clause 11. If the petitioners are still having the grievance, they are having remedy by way of revision as provided under Clause 14.

¶40

In the said circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of setting the petitioners at liberty to move the appellate authority by way of appropriate proceedings in terms of the statutory provision. Without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to avail the aforesaid remedies, interference is declined and the writ petition is dismissed.

¶41

Sd/-

¶42

P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE)

¶43

kmd

P.a.Jose v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.a.Jose v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Dhushyanthan Vs Saju.D

M.P.Varghese Vs State of Kerala

Subhash K.S. Vs the District Collector, Thrissur

Abdul Ashraf Vs Union of India

Kadeeja Vs the Tahsildar

Gopinathan Nair Vs the State of Kerala