Allowed

Season Rubbers v. Director of Industrieds & Commerce

Kerala HC21 Jan 2016WP(C)/5173/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that if the petitioner was otherwise eligible for power tariff subsidy adjustment towards Margin Money Loan, the Director of Industries & Commerce ought to have granted the benefit. Ext.P14 order setting aside the benefit rejection is set aside, directing reconsideration with benefit from entitlement date.

What did the court decide?

Impugned Ext.P14 order is set aside. Director of Industries & Commerce to reconsider matter and grant benefit if petitioner is eligible, from date of entitlement, within two months.

Season Rubbers Vs Director of Industrieds & Commerce — Company and Corporate | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY 2016/1ST MAGHA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 5173 of 2013 (V)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

M/S.SEASON RUBBERS, CHOTTANIKKARA.P.O, ERNAKULAM REPRESENTED BY PARTNERSMT.SUJATHA BAIJU.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER SRI.FIROZ K.ROBIN

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES & COMMERCE, VIKAS BHAVAN, PMG JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶11

2. GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, ERNAKULAM-682030.

¶12

3. SPECIAL OFFICER (REVENUE), KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDHUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004.

¶13

R1 & 2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MANOJ KUNJACHAN R3 BY SRI.JAICE JACOB,SC

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

¶16

WP(C).No. 5173 of 2013 (V)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS

¶19

EXT-P1	TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(MS)DATED 4/92/PD DATRED 6.2.1992
EXT-P2	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 16.11.2000 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXT-P3	TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 28.11.2000 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT
EXT-P4	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DSTED 1.4.2002 ALLOWING CONCESSIONAL TARIFF TO THE PETITIONER
EXT-P5	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 1.4.2002 CERTIFYING THAT THE PETITIONER IS ELIGIBLE FOR SUBSIDY OF RS.1,68,480/- FROM THE INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT.
EXT-P6	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 13.11.1998 IN O.P.9404/1998 AND CONNECTED CASES.
EXT-P7	TRUE COPY OF THE BOARD ORDER NO.254/99 (PLG.COM 3443/97) DATED 28.1.19999.
EXT-P8	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 5.7.2002 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXT-P9	TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 28.8.2002 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXT-P10	TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL/OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT
EXT-P11	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 19.6.2003 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXT-P12	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 20.1.2012 IN WP(C)30968/2003.
EXT-P13	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 1.4.2013 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT.
EXT.P14	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 4/1/13 ISSUED BY THE R1
EXT.P15	TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 22/5/13 ISSUED BY THE R2
EXT.P16	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 7/4/2000 IN OP.20664/99.

¶20

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS

¶21

-------------------------------------- NIL.

/ TRUE COPY /

P.S. TO JUDGE

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

¶26

================== W.P.(C).No. 5173 of 2013

¶27

==================

¶28

Dated this the 21^st day of January, 2016

¶29

J U D G M E N T

¶30

The issue in this writ petition is with regard to the adjustment of power tariff subsidy claimed by the petitioner towards the Margin Money Loan. The petitioner's claim has been rejected by the Director of Industries & Commerce by Ext.P14 order.

¶31

As seen from the impugned order, the main reason

¶32

for rejection is that the petitioner has not filed any formal application in this regard.

¶33

This Court is of the view that, if otherwise the petitioner is entitled for the adjustment, the Director of Industries & Commerce ought to have given the benefit to the petitioner. In such a circumstances, Ext.P14 is set aside and the

¶34

Director of Industries & Commerce shall reconsider the matter afresh. If it is found that the petitioner is otherwise eligible,

¶35

W.P.(C).No. 5173 of 2013 - : 2 :-

¶36

benefit shall be given to the petitioner from the date on which he was entitled. Needful shall be done within two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment after notice to the petitioner.

¶37

The writ petition is disposed of, as above.

¶38

sd/-

¶39

sab

¶40

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE

¶41

W.P.(C).No. 5173 of 2013 - : 3 :-

Season Rubbers v. Director of Industrieds & Commerce

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Season Rubbers v. Director of Industrieds & Commerce

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Muhammed Faizal Vs the District Geologist

Vinod Kumar R. Vs the Executive Engineer, PWD

Mini Marson Vs Geologist

Varghese T.T. Vs Ksrtc

R.Vijayan Vs the Sub Regional Joint Transport Officer

Sukesh S.V Nair Vs State of Kerala