Allowed

Jeethu Martin v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC29 Jan 2021WP(C)/2299/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the petitioner challenged the Third Respondent (District Geologist)'s refusal to refund excess royalty. The court directed the Second Respondent (Appellate Authority) to consider and pass orders on the filed appeal within eight weeks after hearing the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on the Ext.P16 appeal within eight weeks after hearing the petitioner.

Jeethu Martin Vs State of Kerala — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021/9TH MAGHA, 1942

¶5

W.P(C).No.2299 OF 2021(J)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

JEETHU MARTIN

¶8

AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.MARTIN (LATE), 48/557 G, MARTIN HOMES, EDAPPALLY SOUTH, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682 026.

¶9

BY ADVS.SHRI.AJIT G ANJARLEKAR

¶10

SRI.G.P.SHINOD

¶11

SRI.GOVIND PADMANAABHAN

¶12

RESPONDENTS:

¶13

1 STATE OF KERALA

¶14

REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶15

2 THE DEPUTY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001, (APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER SUB-CLAUSES (A) AND (B) OF SUB-RULE 1 OF RULE 27 OF THE KERALA MINERALS (PREVENTION OF ILLEGAL MINING, STORAGE & TRANSPORTATION), 2015).

¶16

3 THE DISTRICT GEOLOGIST, DISTRICT OFFICE, DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, KAKKANAD POST, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682 030.

¶17

4 THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695 001.

¶18

BY SRI.PAUL ABRAHAM VAKKANAL, GOVT. PLEADER

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

W.P.(C).No.2299/2021 :: 2 ::

¶21

J U D G M E N T

¶22

Against Ext.P15 order of the Geologist refusing to refund the alleged excess amounts paid by way of royalty, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P16 appeal before the 2^nd respondent. The limited prayer of the petitioner is for a direction to the 2^nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P16 appeal, expeditiously, after hearing him.

¶23

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

¶24

On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the Bar, I dispose the writ petition with a direction to the 2^nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P16 appeal, within an outer limit of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition together with a copy of this judgment before the 2^nd respondent, for further action.

¶25

Sd/-

¶26

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶27

prp/29/1/2021

¶28

W.P.(C).No.2299/2021 :: 3 ::

¶29

APPENDIX

¶30

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶31

EXHIBIT P1	A TRUE COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED 02.03.2018 EXECUTED BY NATIONAL BUILDERS, EDAPPALLY, IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT.
EXHIBIT P2	A TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT NO.C4/1420/16 DATED 14.12.2016 ISSUED BY CHERANALLOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT.
EXHIBIT P3	A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 03.04.2018 BY THE OVERSEER AND ASSISTANT ENGINEER OF CHERANALLOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT.
EXHIBIT P4	A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27.03.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE SECRETARY, CHERANALLOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5	A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.07.2018 OF THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN WPC NO.14032 OF 2018.
EXHIBIT P6	A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 04.07.2018 ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY, CHERANALLOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT.
EXHIBIT P7	A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 24.07.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8	A TRUE COPY OF THE CHALLAN DATED 06.08.2018 ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT TREASURY, ERNAKULAM.
EXHIBIT P9	A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 08.08.2018 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P10	A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 24.09.2018 BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE SECRETARY, CHERANALLOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT.
EXHIBIT P11	A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 10.01.2019 OF THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN WPC NO.39438 OF 2018.

¶32

W.P.(C).No.2299/2021 :: 4 ::

¶33

EXHIBIT P12	A TRUE ISSUED	COPY OF THE CHALLAN DATED 01.03.2019 BY THE DISTRICT TREASURY, ERNAKULAM.
EXHIBIT P13	A TRUE VIDE DISTRIC DEPARTM	COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 06.03.2019 NO.409(8-19/DOE/342/E2/18 BY THE T GEOLOGIST, MINING AND GEOLOGY ENT, ERNAKULAM.
EXHIBIT P14	A TRUE 26.2.20 BEFORE	COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 20 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P15	A TRUE ISSUED GEOLOGI ERNAKUL	COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03.7.2020 BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT/DISTRICT ST, MINING AND GEOLOGY DEPARTMENT, AM,
EXHIBIT P16	A TRUE PREFERR RESPOND	COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 24.09.2020 ED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND ENT.

¶34

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL.

¶35

//TRUE COPY//

¶36

P.S. TO JUDGE

Jeethu Martin v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jeethu Martin v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sarojini Amma K. Vs Udayamperur Panchayath

Jophy Vs the Local Level Monitoring Committee

Rajan, Vs State of Kerala

Moosa, Vs the District Collector Kozhikode

Saud Vayanoli Poyil Vs Deputy Tahsildar

Surendran Vs Aji