Allowed

M. Krishnankutty v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC10 Jan 2023WP(C)/360/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition was dismissed after the principal petitioner died. The court directed the District Collector to consider the legal heirs application for amnesty scheme benefits within two months, adhering to relevant Government Orders and providing hearing notice.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the District Collector, Thrissur to consider the Ext.P5 application for amnesty scheme benefits within two months, providing notice and hearing.

M. Krishnankutty Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 10^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 20TH POUSHA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 360 OF 2014

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

*1 M. KRISHNANKUTTY, AGED 73 YEARS S/O.KARUPPAN, MEKKATTUTHODI, VETTIKATTIRI POST, THALAPPILLY TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. [DIED] L.Rs ARE IMPLEADED

¶8

2 PADMINI AGED 70 YEARS W/O. LATE M KRISHNANKUTTY.

¶9

3 INDIRA DEVI AGED 48 YEARS D/O. LATE M KRISHNANKUTTY.

¶10

4 VIJAYAKUMAR M.K. AGED 44 YEARS S/O. LATE M KRISHNANKUTTY.

¶11

5 RETHNAKUMARI AGED 41 YEARS D/O. LATE M KRISHNANKUTTY.

¶12

6 JAYASREE AGED 39 YEARS D/O. LATE M KRISHNANKUTTY,

¶13

ALL RESIDING AT MEKKATTUTHODI, VETTIKATTIRI POST, THALAPPILLY TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶14

ADDL P2 TO P6 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 20.10.2017 VIDE I.A.NO. 14931/2017

¶15

BY ADV SRI.R.SREEHARI

¶16

RESPONDENTS:

¶17

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,

¶18

W.P.(C.) No. 360/2014 2

¶19

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶20

2 THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA TAXES (A) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶21

3 COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014.

¶22

4 DEPUTY EXCISE COMMISSIONER CIVIL STATION, PALAKKAD 678 001.

¶23

5 EXCISE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OFFICE OF THE EXCISE CIRCLE INSPECTOR, OTTAPALAM 679 102.

¶24

6 DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION AYYANTHOLE,

¶25

THRISSUR 680 003.

¶26

7 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR 680 003.

¶27

8 TAHSILDAR (RR), TALUK OFFICE THALAPPILLY VADAKKANCHERRY 680 582.

¶28

9 VILLAGE OFFICER PANGAL VILLAGE OFFICE, PANJAL POST 679 531.

¶29

R1 TO R9 BY SRI.JOBY JOSEPH,SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶30

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶31

W.P.(C.) No. 360/2014 3

¶32

JUDGMENT

¶33

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the

¶34

following reliefs:-

¶35

“ i. Issue a writ of Mandamus or other appropriate Writ, order or direction, directing the 4^th respondent to consider the petitioner's application for availing the benefit of Amensty Scheme in terms of Ext. P3 order passed by the 2^nd respondent and pass orders within a specified period;

¶36

ii. Issue a writ of Mandamus or other appropriate Writ, order or direction, directing the 6^th respondent to drop all proceedings initiated for assignment of 0.2226 hectares of l land in S.Y. No. 8/5 of Panjal Village under the Kerala Land Reforms Act pending consideration of the Application for availing the benefit of Amnesty Scheme pending before the 4^th Respondent; ”

¶37

During the pendency of the writ petition, the writ petitioner died, consequent to which petitioners 2 to 6, his legal heirs are impleaded. The subject issue relates to the abkari arrears due from the petitioner who was a toddy shop licensee. Even according to the petitioner, in order to realise the abkari dues property belonging to the petitioner Sri.M. Krishnankutty was sold and the Government has purchased the land as 'bought-in-land' The case projected by the petitioner is that later Government as per Ext.P3

¶38

order dated 25.10.2013 bearing No. G.O.(MS.)No.

¶39

W.P.(C.) No. 360/2014 4

¶40

181/13/TD has introduced a one time settlement scheme and the petitioner was intimated accordingly, as per Ext.P4 communication by the Excise Circle Inspector, Ottappalam dated 28.10.2013. Accordingly, petitioner has submitted Ext.P5 application before the District Collector, Thrissur who is the competent authority, which is pending consideration. It is seeking appropriate direction for disposal of Ext.P5 application, this writ petition is filed.

¶41

A statement is filed for and on behalf of the fourth respondent justifying the action of the Government in selling of the property of the petitioner and also contending that the petitioner is not entitled to get the benefit of Ext. P3 Government Order. Whatever that be, it was consequent to Ext.P4 communication issued by the Excise Circle Inspector, Ottappalam petitioner has submitted Ext.P5 representation seeking benefits of Ext.P3 order. Necessarily, the said application has to be considered by the statutory authority as per Ext.P3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the District Collector has to consider the application in terms of Ext.P3.

¶42

W.P.(C.) No. 360/2014 5

¶43

After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.R.Sreehari and learned Senior Government Pleader, Sri. Joby Joseph, I am of the considered opinion that since it is an application based on Government Order, necessarily a decision is to be taken by the authority under the said order.

¶44

Therefore, there will be a direction to the District Collector, Thrissur – the sixth respondent to consider Ext.P5 application, in accordance with law, taking into account the benefits of Ext.P3 and also bearing in mind that the petitioner has submitted the application on the basis of Ext.P4 communication issued by the Excise Circle Inspector, Ottappalam, at the earliest and at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after providing a notice of hearing and participation to the legal heirs of the writ petitioner.

Sd/-

SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE

DCS/10.01.2023

W.P.(C.) No. 360/2014 6

¶49

APPENDIX

¶50

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶51

EXT.P1	PHOTOCOPY OF JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.4217/2013 DATED 25/02/2013.
EXT.P2	PHOTO COPY OF THE ORDER G O (RT) NO.5658/2013/RD DT.22/10/2013 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXT.P3	PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER GO (MS) NO.181/13/TD DATED 25/10/2013.
EXT.P4	PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER DATED 28/10/2013 OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT.
EXT.P5	PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 23/12/2013 FILED BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR.

¶52

RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURE

¶53

ANNEXURE R4(a)	A TRUE COPY OF THE GO(MS) NO.88/68/RD DATED 09.02.1968
ANNEXURE R4(b)	A TRUE COPY OF THE GO(MS) NO.76/13/RD dated 01.03.2013
ANNEXURE R4(c)	A TRUE COPY OF THE GO(MS) NO. 181/13/RD dated 03.05.2013
ANNEXURE R4(d)	A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.258/09/RD DATED 04.07.2009
ANNEXURE R4(e)	A TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(RT) NO. 5658/2013/RD DATED 22.10.2013

M. Krishnankutty v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M. Krishnankutty 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

Bindu Satish Vs the Karthikappally Grama Panchayat

Shajahan Vs the Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Abdul Kareem Vs the Perinthalmanna Municipality

Rajeesh.K.K, Vs the State of Kerala

Ajith C.Nair Vs State of Kerala

Geevarghese Mathew Vs State of Kerala