Remanded

Satheeshan.K v. Diatrict Collector

Kerala HC5 Nov 2019WP(C)/25798/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala, on admission of a writ petition, directed the additional third respondent (Land Revenue Commissioner) to consider and dispose of the petitioner's appeal within three months after providing an opportunity of hearing.

What did the court decide?

Directed the additional third respondent to take up and dispose of Ext.P4 appeal within three months after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing.

Satheeshan.K Vs Diatrict Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 14TH KARTHIKA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.25798 OF 2019(Y)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SATHEESHAN.K AGED 43 YEARS S/O.KUNHIKANNAN, KEENERY HOUSE, KIZHAKKUMBAD, PO VELLUR, PAYYANNUR TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670 307

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.M.V.AMARESAN

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 DISTRICT COLLECTOR KASARAGOD, PIN-671 121.

¶11

2 ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KASARAGOD, PIN-671 121

¶12

3 ADDL.R3 THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 001. ADDL. R3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 05.11.2019 IN I.A.NO.2 OF 2019

¶13

BY SMT.VINEETHA, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

W.P.(C)No.25798 of 2019

¶16

¶17

J U D G M E N T

¶18

Challenging Ext.P2 order passed by the second respondent under the Explosives Rules, 2008 the petitioner has preferred Ext.P4 appeal. The limited prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner when the matter was taken up, was for a direction to the additional third respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 appeal.

¶19

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as

¶20

also the learned Government Pleader.

¶21

Having regard to the facts and circumstances

¶22

of the case, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the additional third respondent to take up and dispose of Ext.P4 appeal within a period of three months, after affording

¶23

the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. Ordered accordingly.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.

¶26

¶27

W.P.(C)No.25798 of 2019

¶28

¶29

APPENDIX

¶30

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶31

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON 12.07.2019 EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF POSTAL RECEIPT OF EXHIBIT P1 DATED 12.07.2019 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF ORDER 4158/18 DATED 6-42018 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF EXPLOSIVE LICENCE BEARING NO.49/KAS D.DIS/43450/2013/D5 IN THE YEAR 2014 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF APPEAL DATED 28-10-2019 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF POSTAL RECEIPT DATED 2910-2019.

¶32

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL

¶33

//TRUE COPY//

¶34

PA TO JUDGE

¶35

Satheeshan.K v. Diatrict Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satheeshan.K v. Diatrict 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

Lurdh Matha Constructions Vs the Superintending Engineer

Ashraf.N.M. Vs the Chief Executive Officer

Ambujakshan.K Vs Kerala Water Authority

Alakkode Grama Panchayath Vs Sreedharan K.K

Rohit John Vs the State of Kerala

Navin Construction Corporation Vs the Kerala Water Authority