Disposed

Shamsudeen Ayamon, v. the Director of Industries and Commerce

Kerala HC15 Oct 2019WP(C)/18726/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, who holds industrial plots on hire purchase since 2010 with cleared dues, filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to consider his application for issuance of patta expeditiously, specifically within six weeks, after hearing him.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 1st and 2nd respondents to consider the petitioner's application for grant of 'patta' within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment, after hearing the petitioner

Shamsudeen Ayamon, Vs the Director of Industries and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 23RD ASWINA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.18726 OF 2019(M)

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

SHAMSUDEEN AYAMON, AYAMON HOUSE, KOLAR ROAD, DOWN HILL, MALAPPURAM 676 519

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.SAJEEV KUMAR K.GOPAL

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 THE DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 003

¶11

2 THE DISTRICT MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, MALAPPURAM 676 505

¶12

3 THE MANKADA BLOCK PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, RAMAPURAM P.O, MALAPPURAM DIUSTRICT 679 321

¶13

R3 BY ADV. SRI.E.C.AHAMED FAZIL

¶14

GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.DIVYA S.

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C).No.18726 OF 2019(M)

¶17

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

The petitioner, who was allotted plot numbers B8, B17 and B18 under the Paloorkotta Industrial Estate on hire purchase basis in 2010, has been operating an industrial unit in the said plots for the past nine years. It is stated that no amount is due from the petitioner to the industrial department and that the dues to the Block Panchayath have also been cleared by the petitioner. The petitioner has produced Ext.P4 communication of the Block Panchayath Office, Mankada, Ramapuram, to indicate that there is no dues outstanding to the Block Panchayath from the petitioner. The petitioner has since approached the 1^st respondent, through the 2^nd respondent, by Ext.P5 application, seeking the issuance of a 'patta' in respect of the units allotted to him. The limited prayer in the writ petition at this stage is for a direction to the 1^st and 2^nd respondents to consider and pass orders on Ext.P5 application expeditiously, after hearing the petitioner.

¶20

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.

¶21

On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the Bar, there will be a direction to the 1^st and 2^nd respondents to consider Ext.P5 application preferred by the petitioner for grant of 'patta' in respect of the industrial units allotted to him in 2010, expeditiously, and at any rate, within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner and others likely to be affected by the orders to be passed by the 1^st and 2^nd respondents. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment together with a copy of the writ petition before the 1^st and 2^nd respondents for further action.

¶22

Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶23

¶24

WP(C).No.18726 OF 2019(M)

¶25

¶26

APPENDIX

¶27

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶28

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. BP/41/IDP/B8 DATED 26-05-2010
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE BOND EXECUTED WITH THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER DATED 26-05- 2010
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE BOND EXECUTED BY SRI. A. MUHAMMED YOUSAF WITH THE 3RD RESPONDENT AGREEING FOR TRANSFER THE PLOT TO THE PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF INFORMATION FURNISHED UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT TO SRI. ONE NOUSHADALI M FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 23-07-2018
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT OFFICER OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT BLOCK PANCHAYAT

¶29

Shamsudeen Ayamon, v. the Director of Industries and Commerce

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shamsudeen Ayamon, v. the Director of Industries and Commerce

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

M/S. Silverstone Rubber India Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Kerala

M/S.Silverstone Rubber India Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Kerala

M/S.Silverstone Rubber India Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Kerala

K.M.Ignatius, Vs Kerala Small Industries Development Corporation Limited

Ponnu Vs the Thasildar(L.R.)

Gopinath.v Vs State of Kerala