Disposed

Smt. Ponnamma Devasia v. the District Collector

Kerala HC24 Mar 2023WP(C)/3598/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a PIL-type dispute, the wife of a co-licensee sought quashing of recovery proceedings regarding arrears allegedly due. The Court did not quash the proceedings but ordered the petitioner to remit the disclosed amount within one month to stop recovery and enable mutation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to remit the amount covered under Annexure R5(a) within one month; recovery proceedings deemed unenforceable upon payment; permit mutation and land tax payment thereafter.

Smt. Ponnamma Devasia Vs the District Collector — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V FRIDAY, THE 24^TH DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 3RD CHAITHRA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 3598 OF 2023

¶3

PETITIONER/S:

¶4

SMT.PONNAMMADEVASIA
AGED72YEARS
W/O.DEVASIAOUSEPH,ERUPATHILPARAMBUHOUSE,
LAKSHAMVEEDUCOLONY,VELIYANADUPOST,
KUTTANADU,ALAPPUZHA,PIN–689590

¶5

BYADVS.
SOJANJAMES
JOHNYMONTHOMAS

¶6

RESPONDENT/S:

¶7

1THEDISTRICTCOLLECTOR
FIRSTFLOOR,COLLECTORATE,
ALAPPUZHA,KERALA,INDIA,PIN-688001
2THEDISTRICTCOLLECTOR
COLLECTORATE,KOTTAYAM-KUMILYRD,
KOTTAYAM.,PIN-680002
3THASILDAR
TALUKOFFICE,KUTTANADU,KIDANGARAMANKOMBURD,
MONCOMPU,ALAPPUZHA,PIN-688502
4THEVILLAGEOFFICER
MUTTUCHIRAKAPPUMTHALAROAD,
MUTTUCHIRA,PIN-686613
5THEWELFAREFUNDINSPECTOR
KERALAABKARIWORKERSWELFAREFUNDBOARD,
REGIONALOFFICE,MARKETROAD,
ERNAKULAM,PIN-682035
BYADVS.KRISHNAMOORTHY(ERNAKULAM),SC
SMT.AMMINIKUTTY,SRGP

¶8

THISWRITPETITION(CIVIL)HAVINGCOMEUPFOR
ADMISSIONON24.03.2023,THECOURTONTHESAMEDAY
DELIVEREDTHEFOLLOWING:

¶9

W.P.(C) No.3598 of 2023

¶10

¶11

JUDGMENT

¶12

The petitioner herein is the wife of Sri. Devasia Ouseph. He, along with certain Mrs. Marykutty Xavier, were the licensees of various foreign liquor shops in Kattappana and Vandiperiyar in the Idukki district. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents initiated recovery proceedings on the premise that certain amounts were due from the petitioner herein. The petitioner asserts that though the amount due as on 1996-1997 was Rs.28/- and Rs.24592/- in respect of FL1-98 and FL1-94, respectively, the amount as on date with interest due is Rs.524/and Rs.4,59,872/-. The petitioner asserts that recovery proceedings have been initiated by the respondents for recovering the amount which has already been paid by the co-licensee. It is in the afore circumstances that the writ petition is filed seeking to quash the recovery proceedings.

¶13

A statement has been filed by the Standing Counsel for Respondent No.5. It is stated that the petitioner has already been informed that the amount due under Annexure-R5 (a) statement is due

¶14

W.P.(C) No.3598 of 2023

¶15

¶16

from them.

¶17

Sri. Sojan James, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that in order to avoid any controversy, the petitioner is prepared to remit the amount as disclosed from the statement filed by the 5th respondent before this Court.

¶18

In that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of, directing the petitioner to remit the amount covered under the statement within a period of one month. On effecting payment as ordered above, the recovery proceedings initiated against the petitioner will become unenforceable. If, after payment of the arrears as ordered above, there are no other impediments, the revenue authorities concerned shall permit the petitioner to effect mutation and to pay land tax.

¶19

Sd/-

¶20

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, JUDGE

¶21

¶22

W.P.(C) No.3598 of 2023

¶23

¶24

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3598/2023

¶25

PETITIONEREXHIBITS:

¶26

Exhibit-P1ATRUECOPYOFTHECOMMUNICATIONSENTTOSMT.
MARYKUTTYXAVIERFROMTHEOFFICEOFTHE5TH
RESPONDENTDATED19-11-2020

¶27

Exhibit-P2ACOPYOFTHEREQUISITIONLETTERISSUEDFROM
THEWELFAREFUNDOFFICEDATED14-01-2022
Exhibit-P3ATRUECOPYOFTHECERTIFICATEOFTHE4TH
RESPONDENTDATED28-06-2018

¶28

RESPONDENTANNEXURES:

¶29

ANNEXURER5(A)

¶30

TRUECOPIESOFTHELETTERNOF/1067(A)/2019
DATED14.02.2023ALONGWITHTHESTATEMENTOF
ARREARSRELATEDWITHFL1-94

Smt. Ponnamma Devasia v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Ponnamma Devasia 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

Sharukh Sharaf Vs Central Board of Secondary Education

The Federal Bank Ltd. Vs Federal Bank Employees Union

Rajan v T, Vs State of Kerala

P a Shajahan Vs Transport Commissioner

O.A. Abbaskhan, Vs the Regional Transport Authority

Devaki.K.v Vs the Secretary