Allowed

Abhirami.G. v. the District Collector

Kerala HC3 Jun 2022WP(C)/10675/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of the writ petition arising from the petitioner's dissatisfaction with the award of flood compensation. It directed the Permanent Lok Adalath to dispose of her original petition within four months, noting staff shortages and the petitioner's homelessness due to the 2018 floods.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Permanent Lok Adalath to dispose of the original petition (O.P.No.1715 of 2020) within four months.

Abhirami.G. Vs the District Collector — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 3^RD DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 13TH JYAISHTA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 10675 OF 2022

¶5

PETITIONER/S:

¶6

ABHIRAMI.G. AGED 26 YEARS D/O. GOPALAKRISHNAN R, PALLATHUPARAMBU HOUSE, MUTTINAGUM P.O, VARAPPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 683517. BY ADV V.K.HEMA

¶7

RESPONDENT/S:

¶8

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR ERNAKULAM, CHAIRMAN, DISASTER MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM - 682030.

¶9

OTHER PRESENT:

¶10

GP AMMINIKUTTY K.

¶11

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE

¶12

FOLLOWING:

¶13

W.P.(C) No.10675 of 2022

¶14

-2-

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

Dated this the 3^rd day of June, 2022

¶17

The petitioner's dwelling house sustained extreme damage in the 2018 floods. The petitioner has computed her loss at

¶18

Rs.2,80,000/-. Only paltry amount of Rs.10,000/was paid to her compensation by the respondent. Therefore, the petitioner filed O.P.No.1715 of 2020 before the Permanent Lok Adalath, Ernakulam, claiming compensation of Rs.2,80,000/-. This writ petition is filed aggrieved in disposing the original petition.

¶19

In the report submitted by the Chairman of the Permanent Lok Adalath, it is stated that more than 25,000 flood Second Appeals were filed before the Adalath. Initially, 100 to 160 cases were posted daily. Since most of the petitioners failed to appear on the posting dates, the cases

¶20

W.P.(C) No.10675 of 2022

¶21

-3-

¶22

had to be adjourned. Hence, the cases are now

¶23

being adjourned by notification in order to avoid unnecessary calling work. The Chairman has also pointed out the insufficiency of staff at the

¶24

Permanent Lok Adalath for handling the huge

¶25

amount of work. It is assured that the petitioner's original petition will be considered on priority basis, after service of notice on the respondents and on completion of pleadings.

¶26

Learned Government Pleader submitted, on instructions, that the Tahasildar concerned is appearing on behalf of the respondents.

¶27

If so, the Permanent Lok Adalath can

¶28

expedite the consideration of petitioner's original petition, taking note of the fact that she has been rendered homeless in the floods and is living in a hostel.

¶29

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of,

¶30

W.P.(C) No.10675 of 2022

¶31

directing the Permanent Lok Adalath to take earnest efforts to dispose of O.P.No.1715 of 2020 within four months of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Sd/-

V.G.ARUN JUDGE

Scl/

W.P.(C) No.10675 of 2022

¶36

-5-

¶37

APPENDIX

¶38

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶39

EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF O.P.1715/2020 ON THE FILES OF

¶40

PERMANENT LOK ADALATH, ERNAKULAM.

Abhirami.G. v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhirami.G. 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

A. v. Rasiya Vs Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. (Supplyco)

Suresh Kumar K Vs State of Kerala

Sumitha.a.S. Vs the State of Kerala

Jitesh P., Vs the District Magistrate

Thoppil Contractors (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs Kerala Road Fund Board Project Management Unit

Rajesh S. Vs the Kerala State Electricity Board