M.K.Rajappan v. the General Manager, Southern Railway, Thiruvananthapuram.

Kerala HC19 Feb 2016WP(C)/5165/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, who operates a refreshment stall on railway premises, had water disconnected. In this writ petition, the Court directed the Railway to reconnect water immediately. The Court also directed the authority to consider the petitioner's appeal within two months. A deposit of Rs.1 lakh was ordered as a condition for reconnection, payable in two installments over four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Water supply to be reconnected forthwith; opportunity for hearing to be afforded and appeal considered within two months; deposit of Rs.1 lakh in two installments to be made within two weeks.

M.K.Rajappan Vs the General Manager, Southern… — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/30TH MAGHA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 5165 of 2016 (U)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

M.K.RAJAPPAN, S/O. KOCHU,AGED 54 YEARS, BUSINESS, AMOL NIVAS, KURUKKU ROAD, KANJIRAPPILLY, PIN -686 507

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.M.M.HUSAIN SRI.BIJU .C. ABRAHAM SRI.K.A.MANZOOR ALI

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAYS (THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIVISION), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001

¶11

2. THE SENIOR SECTION ENGINEER (WORKS), SOUTHERN RAILWAY, KOTTAYAM -686 001

¶12

BY SRI.C.S.DIAS,SC, RAILWAYS

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

sts

¶15

WP(C).No. 5165 of 2016 (U)

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶18

EXT.P1	TRUE COPY OF THE BILL DT. 15-10-2010 REMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
EXT.P1(A)	TRUE COPY OF THE BILL DT. 15-10-2011 REMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
EXT.P1(B)	TRUE COPY OF THE BILL DT. 15-09-2011 REMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
EXT.P2	TRUE COPY OF THE BILL DATED 15-10-2013 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
EXT.P3	TRUE COPY OF THE BILL DATED 24-06-2014 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
EXT.P4	TRUE COPY OF THE BILL DATED 17-11-2015 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
EXT.P5	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 20/3/2015 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXT.P6	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 14/12/2015 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXT.P7	TRUE COPY OF THE BILL DT. 19-01-2016 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXT.P8	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 18/1/2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
EXT.P9	TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DT 20/1/2016 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT AUTHORITY
EXT.P10	TRUE COPY OF THE WATER TARIFF FIXED BY THE KERALA WATER AUTHORITY DATED 25/09/2014
EXT.P11	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 27-02-2015 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE HIGH COURT IN WP(C) NO.4908/15

¶19

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.S.TO JUDGE

sts

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

¶24

¶25

W.P.(C).No.5165/2016

¶26

¶27

Dated this the 19^th Day of February, 2016

¶28

J U D G M E N T

¶29

The petitioner is occupying railway premises for operating

¶30

refreshment stall. The petitioner's water supply has been

¶31

disconnected. Challenging the said action, the petitioner has

¶32

preferred an appeal before the first respondent. Ext.P9 is the appeal.

¶33

This Court is of the view that the competent authority

¶34

shall consider the appeal within a period of two months after

¶35

affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner.

¶36

Considering the volume of arrears claimed by the Railway, there shall

¶37

be a direction to the petitioner to deposit Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one

¶38

lakh only) within the time stipulated hereunder. However, the water

¶39

W.P.(C).No.5165/2016

¶40

-:2:-

¶41

supply shall be reconnected forthwith. The amount shall be paid in

¶42

two instalments. First of the instalment shall be paid within two

¶43

weeks and the second instalment shall be paid within a further period

¶44

of two weeks. If the petitioner fails to remit Rs.1,00,000/- as directed

¶45

above, the respondents are free to disconnect the water supply.

¶46

Sd/A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE

¶47

M.K.Rajappan v. the General Manager, Southern Railway, Thiruvananthapuram.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.K.Rajappan v. the General Manager, Southern Railway, Thiruvananthapuram.

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

C.S.Nazar Vs Sri.G.Prasad

Deputy Director of Collegiate Education Vs Dr.Malathy

The Principal Chief Forest Conservator (Wild Life)& Chief Wild Life Warden Vs C.S.Nazar

Alphonsa.P Vs the Director

Abdul Rahman Vs the District Collector

K.K.Shaji Vs the Tahsildar, Sulthanbatheri