Disposed

P.C.Mohammed Haji v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC29 Nov 2016RP/955/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a review petition filed by the writ petitioner who sought time to pay under a revenue recovery notice. The court noted no such relief was claimed and granted liberty to initiate fresh proceedings if the petitioner wished to pay later, effectively closing the review petition without substantive adjudication.

What did the court decide?

Granted liberty to initiate fresh proceedings if the petitioner intends to pay the amount; review petition closed.

P.C.Mohammed Haji Vs State of Kerala — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/8TH AGRAHAYANA, 1938

¶5

RP.No. 955 of 2016

¶6

WP(C) 33838/2015 , DATED 26-09-2016

¶7

REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER:

¶8

P.C.MOHAMMED HAJI, S/O.HASSANKUTTY HAJI, AGED 63 YEARS, POOYICHARATHINGAL HOUSE, VAVAD AMSOM DESOM, KODUVALLY, KOZHIKODE.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.M.SHAJU PURUSHOTHAMAN SRI.K.S.RAJESH

¶10

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, MOTOR VEHICLES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695001.

¶12

2. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, RTO OFFICE, KODUVALLY,KOZHIKODE, PIN-673572.

¶13

3. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, RTO OFFICE, KOZHIKODE-673572.

¶14

4. MOHAMMED BASHEER P P, S/O.MOIDEEN HAJI, PUTHENPEEDIKA HOUSE, EENGAPPUZHA, PERUMBALLI PO, MALAPPURAM DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK, PIN-673572.

¶15

5. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR(RR) THAMARASSERY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,PIN-678573.

¶16

6. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VAVAD VILLAGE, THAMARASSERY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN-673572.

¶17

R1-3,5,6 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.V.K.SHAMSUDHEEN

¶18

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-11-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

¶20

RP.No. 955 of 2016

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES

¶23

ANNEXURE A: THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC.33838/15 DT.26/9/16. RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES

¶24

NIL. / TRUE COPY / P.S. TO JUDGE

¶25

¶26

A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.

¶27

R.P.No.955 of 2016

¶28

¶29

W.P.(C).No.33838 of 2015

¶30

Dated this the 29^th day of November, 2016

¶31

O R D E R

¶32

This review petition has been filed by the writ petitioner inter alia contending that though the writ petition was dismissed, the petitioner wanted time to pay the amount in terms of the revenue recovery notice.

¶33

In fact, no such relief had been claimed in the writ petition. Hence, it shall always be open for the petitioner to initiate fresh proceedings, if he intends to pay the amount covered by the revenue recovery notice.

¶34

With the said liberty this review petition is closed.

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

A.M. SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE

¶37

P.C.Mohammed Haji v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.C.Mohammed Haji 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Premkumar Vs K.S.E.B

P.a.Santhosh Vs Mr.Sunil Kumar

Sri.Akhilesh Kumar Yadav Vs the Commercial Tax Officer

Nagaraj.R Vs the Authorised Officer

Archana.T Vs the Authorised Officer and Another

Manoj Madhavan Vs Dr.M.C.Dileep Kumar