Disposed

Siji George v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC28 Jun 2022WP(C)/16883/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition involved the petitioners, legal heirs of a deceased licensee of ARD No.170, seeking transfer of the license. Directed to produce a legal heirship certificate which was pending, the High Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the District Supply Officer to keep the transfer application in abeyance for six weeks and refrain from issuing the license to third parties.

What did the court decide?

Directing the 3rd respondent to keep the final decision on the transfer of licence application in abeyance for six weeks and not to issue the licence to third parties during this period.

Siji George Vs State of Kerala — 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

TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 7TH ASHADHA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 16883 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

1 SIJI GEORGE

¶8

AGED 25 YEARS

¶9

D/O. LATE VARKEY V. J. VETTUKATTIL HOUSE, MANIMOOLY P. O., VARAKKULAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN : 679333.

¶10

2 CHINNAMMA

¶11

AGED 65 YEARS

¶12

W/O. LATE VARKEY V. J., VETTUKATTIL HOUSE, MANIMOOLY
P.O., VARAKKULAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679333.

¶13

3 ELSY SEBASTIAN W/O. BINEESH JOSE, KEREEKATTUKUNNEL, MODAPOIKA P. O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679331.

¶14

BY ADV K.A.AUGUSTINE

¶15

RESPONDENT/S:

¶16

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.

¶17

2 THE DIRECTOR

¶18

OFFICE OF THE CIVIL SUPPLIES COMMISSIONER, PUBLIC
OFFICE BUILDING, MUSEUM, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033.

¶19

3 THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER, NEAR PWD REST HOUSE, KAVUNGAL, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676505.

¶20

4 THE TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER

¶21

OFFICE OF THE TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER, NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN: 679329.

¶22

5 THE TASILDAR

¶23

OFFICE OF THE TAHSILDAR, NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN: 679329.

¶24

OTHER PRESENT:

¶25

GP AMMINIKUTTY K

¶26

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
28.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶27

WP(C) NO. 16883 OF 2022

¶28

¶29

JUDGMENT Dated this the 28th day of June, 2022

¶30

Petitioners are the legal heirs of late V.J Varkey, who

¶31

was the licensee of ARD No.170 in Nilambur Taluk, Malappuram District. Immediately after V.J Varkey’s death, petitioners submitted an application seeking transfer of the ARD licence in favour of the 1^st petitioner. During the course of enquiry into the application, petitioners were directed to produce the legal heirship certificate. Even though the petitioners had taken necessary steps for obtaining the certificate, the prescribed procedure not being over, the certificate is not issued. The petitioners are apprehensive that their application will be rejected and licence issued to third parties, alleging failure to produce the legal heirship certificate.

¶32

Today, when the matter was taken up for consideration, learned Government Pleader submitted that the legal heirship certificate was notified in the Gazette on 7.6.2022 and, following the procedure, the certificate will be issued to the petitioners within 30 days of notification.

¶33

In such circumstances, it is only appropriate that a

¶34

WP(C) NO. 16883 OF 2022

¶35

3

¶36

decision on the petitioners’ application for transfer of licence be kept in abeyance so as to provide them an opportunity to produce the certificate.

¶37

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the 3^rd respondent to keep in abeyance the final decision on the petitioners application for transfer of licence for ARD No.170 in Nilambur Taluk, for a period of six weeks. The petitioners shall, within a week of issuance of the legal heirship certificate, produce the same before the 3^rd respondent. Thereafter, a final decision on the application shall be taken by the 3^rd respondent, with notice to the petitioners. Till such time, licence of ARD No. 170 in Nilambur Taluk shall not be issued to third parties.

¶38

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶39

Sd/V.G ARUN JUDGE

¶40

¶41

WP(C) NO. 16883 OF 2022

¶42

¶43

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16883/2022

¶44

`PETITIO`	`NER`	`EXHIBITS`
`Exhibit`	`P1`	`TRUE COPY` `18/1/2021` `BEFORE THE`	`OF` `SUB` `3R`	`THE` `MITT` `D RE`	`REP` `ED` `SPO`	`RESENTATION DATED` `BY THE 1ST PETITIONER` `NDENT.`
`Exhibit`	`P2`	`TRUE COPY` `19/1/2021` `GRAMA PANC`	`OF` `ISS` `HAY`	`THE` `UED` `ATH.`	`DEA` `BY`	`TH CERTIFICATE DATED` `THE VAZHIKKADAVU`
`Exhibit`	`P3`	`TRUE COPY` `CERTIFICAT` `THE VILLAG`	`OF` `ED` `E O`	`THE` `DATE` `FFIC`	`FAM` `D 1` `ER,`	`ILY MEMBERSHIP` `3/1/2022 ISSUED BY` `VAZHIKKADAVU.`
`Exhibit`	`P4`	`TRUE COPY` `14/1/2022` `VAZHIKKADA`	`OF` `ISS` `VU`	`THE` `UED` `GRAM`	`CER` `BY` `A P`	`TIFICATE DATED` `THE SECRETARY,` `ANCHAYATH.`
`Exhibit`	`P5`	`TRUE COPY` `10/5/2022` `VAZHIKKADA`	`OF` `ISS` `VU`	`THE` `UED` `VILL`	`CER` `BY` `AGE`	`TIFICATE DATED` `THE VILLAGE OFFICER,` `.`
`Exhibit`	`P6`	`TRUE COPY` `ISSUED BY`	`OF` `THE`	`THE` `3RD`	`ORD` `RE`	`ER DATED 11.4.2022` `SPONDENT.`
`Exhibit`	`P7`	`TRUE COPY` `APPLICATIO` `MANORAMA D`	`OF` `NS` `AIL`	`THE` `FOR` `Y DA`	`ADV` `ARD` `TED`	`ERTISEMENT INVITING` `APPEARED IN MALAYALA` `18.5.2022`
`Exhibit`	`P8`	`TRUE COPY` `26.5.2022` `BEFORE THE`	`OF` `SUB` `5T`	`THE` `MITT` `H RE`	`REP` `ED` `SPO`	`RESENTATION DATED` `BY THE 1ST PETITIONER` `NDENT.`
`Exhibit`	`P9`	`TRUE COPY` `26.5.2022` `BEFORE THE` `SUPPLIES.`	`OF` `SUB` `HO`	`THE` `MITT` `N'BL`	`REP` `ED` `E M`	`RESENTATION DATED` `BY THE 1ST PETITIONER` `INISTER FOR CIVIL`

Siji George v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Siji George 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.K.Ramachandran Vs the State of Kerala

Radiance Realty Developers India Ltd., Vs the State of Kerala

Suresh Mathew, Vs the Chief Conservator of Forest

Khadeeja Vs Union of India

V.S.Udayababu Vs Kerala Water Authority

Krishnakumari Vs Kerala State Transport Project