Disposed

Daya General Hospital Private Limited v. the District Collector

Kerala HC21 Nov 2019WP(C)/11884/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court held that the petitioners had an alternative statutory remedy under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy and Wetland Act, 2008. The petitioners invoked this remedy by filing a revision. The court directed the 8th respondent to dispose of the revision petition within three months and maintained the interim stay until the revision is decided.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 8th respondent to dispose of the revision petition within three months, maintaining the interim stay until disposal.

Daya General Hospital Private Limited Vs the District… — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 30TH KARTHIKA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.11884 OF 2019(I)

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

DAYA GENERAL HOSPITAL PRIVATE LIMITED SHORNUR ROAD, THIRUVAMBADI (PO)., THRISSUR- 680022, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR DR.V.K.ABDUL AZEEZ, AGED 62 YEARS, S/O.MAMMAD HAJI.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.N.M.MADHU SRI.M.C.ASHI SMT.C.S.RAJANI

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR- 680 003.

¶11

2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, 1ST FLOOR, CIVIL STATION, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR DISTRICT- 680 003.

¶12

3 THE PRINCIPAL AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, SAKTHAN THAMBURAN NAGAR, TRISSUR- 680 001.

¶13

4 THE TAHSILDAR, THRISSUR TALUK, CHEMBUKAVU P.O., THRISSUR- 680 020.

¶14

5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PERINGAVU VILLAGE, CHEROOR P.O., TRISSUR- 680 008.

¶15

6 THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF THRISSUR, CORPORATION OFFICE, THRISSUR- 680 001.

¶16

7 GEORGE VATTUKULAM, STATE PRESIDENT, MALAYALA VEDI, RAMAVARMAPURAM, KUTTUMUKKU, THRISSUR- 680 631.

¶17

WP(C).No.11884 OF 2019(I) 2

¶18

8 ADDL. R8. AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION COMMISSIONER AND PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶19

(ADDITIONAL R8 IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 21/11/2019 IN WPC 11884/2019)

¶20

R6 BY SRI. SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL, SC, THRISSUR CORPORATION

¶21

R7 BY ADV. SMT.SANDHYA RAJU

¶22

OTHER PRESENT:

¶23

GP POOJA SURENDRAN

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

WP(C).No.11884 OF 2019(I) 3

¶26

JUDGMENT

¶27

The petitioner has approached this Court

¶28

impugning Ext.P1 proceedings issued by the District Collector under the provisions of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy and Wetland Act, 2008.

¶29

However, when this matter was taken up today, the learned counsel for the petitioner conceded that his client has an alternative

¶30

remedy and that they have invoked the same, as is evident from Ext.P6, by filing an appropriate revision before the Agricultural Commissioner

¶31

and Principal Secretary, Government of Kerala,

¶32

Thiruvananthapuram. He, therefore, prays that Ext.P6 be taken up and directed to be disposed of at the earliest.

¶33

I have examined the materials on record

¶34

and have also evaluated the pleadings available.

¶35

It is without doubt that the petitioner

¶36

has approached this Court impugning Ext.P1 on various grounds, but as has been conceded by the

¶37

WP(C).No.11884 OF 2019(I) 4

¶38

learned counsel for the petitioner, the said order is amenable to an alternative Statutory and efficacious remedy under the applicable statute. Since the petitioner has already invoked the same, as is evident from Ext.P6, I deem it appropriate to order this Writ Petition and direct the 8^th respondent to take up Ext.P6 revision petition of the petitioner and dispose of the same, after following due procedure, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is so ordered.

¶39

Needless to say, until such exercise is

¶40

completed and the resultant order issued to the petitioner, the interim order granted by this Court on 7.5.2019 and extended from time to time will, remain in force.

¶41

This Writ Petition is thus ordered.

¶42

Sd/-

¶43

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE

¶44

¶45

WP(C).No.11884 OF 2019(I) 5

¶46

APPENDIX

¶47

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶48

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18.03.2019 SERVED ON THE PETITIONER ON 08.04.2019.

¶49

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.4587/2004 DATED 02.07.2004 OF S.R.O. THRISSUR.

¶50

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE DATA BANK MAINTAINED BY THE AGRICULTURAL DEPARTMENT.

¶51

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER FOR CONVERSION OF THE NATURE OF LAND.

¶52

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER EVIDENCING THE SUBMISSION OF EXT.P4.

¶53

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL

¶54

¶55

//TRUE COPY// CA TO JUDGE

Daya General Hospital Private Limited v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Daya General Hospital Private Limited v. the District Collector

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

Shiny Jacob Vs State of Kerala

Chandran K.P. Vs the Olavanna Grama Panchayath

Biju.M.D., Vs Kochi Municipal Corporation

Salmathul Shamseera, Vs the Local Level Monitoring Committee

Jyothi Krishnan Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Rehim Vs the Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram