Disposed

Juliet E J v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Jan 2022WP(C)/721/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court held that recovery proceedings initiated against a petitioner regarding ARD license dues must be deferred until a pending statutory appeal is finally disposed of. The court directed the authorities to decide the pending appeal within three months.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to defer recovery proceedings (Ext.P3) till final orders on pending statutory appeal (Ext.P2). 3rd respondent to defer proceedings. 1st respondent to dispose of appeal within thre

Juliet E J Vs State of Kerala — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 11^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022/21ST POUSHA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 721 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

JULIET E.J., AGED 72 YEARS, W/O.ANTONY M.L., MANTHRA HOUSE, PERUMPILLY NJARAKKAL, ERNAKULAM DT. PIN – 682 505.

¶8

BY ADVS. S.SUDHISH KUMAR SIBI KARUN K B DAYAL

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANAMTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 001.

¶11

2 THE COMMISSIONER, CIVIL SUPPLIES COMMISSIONARATE, PUBLIC OFFICE COMPLEX, THIRUVANAMTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 033.

¶12

3 THE TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER, TALUK SUPPLY OFFICE, KOCHI, PIN – 682 001.

¶13

BY ADV.SRI.APPU P.S., G.P.

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C)No.721/2022

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 11^th day of January, 2022

¶19

The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by the recovery proceedings initiated under Ext.P3. The petitioner who is a senior citizen was conducting an ARD under the respondents. The District Supply Officer cancelled the ARD Licence issued to the petitioner. The petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 appeal and the appeal is now pending before the 1^st respondent. While the statutory appeal is pending, the 3^rd respondent has issued Ext.P3 order demanding amount which issue is subject mater in Ext.P2 appeal proceedings. The petitioner would submit that unless the recovery is deferred till the disposal of the statutory appeal, the petitioner will be put to untold hardship and loss.

¶20

¶21

WP(C)No.721/2022

¶22

The learned Government Pleader entered

¶23

appearance and opposed the writ petition. The Government Pleader submitted that in view of the cancellation of ARD Licence issued to the petitioner, the petitioner is bound to repay the amount due to the public exchequer. The writ petition is therefore not maintainable.

¶24

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

¶25

Since a statutory appeal, Ext.P2, is pending consideration before the 1^st respondent, this Court is of the view that the recovery of the amounts which is also a subject matter in the appeal would not be in the interest of justice. In the circumstances, the respondents are liable to be compelled to defer the recovery proceedings till the statutory appeal is heard and finally disposed of.

¶26

¶27

¶28

In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of

¶29

directing the 3^rd respondent to defer the proceedings initiated as per Ext.P3, till final orders are passed on Ext.P2 appeal. The 1^st respondent is directed to dispose of Ext.P2 statutory appeal as expeditiously as possible and at any

¶30

rate, within a period of three months.

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

N. NAGARESH JUDGE

ncd/11.01.2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 721/2022

¶37

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶38

Exhibit-P1	PHOTOSTAT COPY PASSED BY TH	OF E	THE DISMISSAL ORDER 2ND RESPONDENT BY
	NO.A8-688/2020	DA	TED 27.10.2021
EXHIBIT-P2	PHOTOSTAT COPY	O	F THE APPEAL DATED
	12.11.2021 FIL	ED	BY THE PETITIONER
	BEFORE THE 1S PRODUCING ANNEX	T UR	RESPONDENT WITHOUT ES
Exhibit-P3	PHOTOSTAT COPY	OF	THE ORDER OF DEMAND
	ISSUED BY THE 3	RD	RESPONDENT BY NO.A-
	2174/2014 DATED	2	6.11.2021

Juliet E J v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Juliet E J 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

Noushad M. Vs the District Level Authorization Committee for Transplantation of Human Organs

Sajeev P.D. Vs the District Level Authorization Committee for Transplantation of Human Organ

Kiran R. G. Vs the Station House Officer

Sabeena .S Vs State of Kerala

Siju P. R. Vs the State of Kerala

The Chairman, Vs the State of Kerala