Partly allowed

Subhash T S v. the District Collector Idukki

Kerala HC14 Feb 2023WP(C)/974/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court quashed an order rejecting a revision petition solely on delay grounds, citing an Apex Court judgment. It directed the first respondent to examine the petition on merits and pass appropriate orders within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Exhibit P3 order set aside; directed 1st respondent to consider petitioner's revision petition on merits within six weeks.

Subhash T S Vs the District Collector Idukki — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 14^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023 / 25TH MAGHA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 974 OF 2023

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SUBHASH T S AGED 35 YEARS S/O SUKUMARAN, THONIKUZHIYIL, PERINCHANKUTTY P.O, SENAPATHY, VATHIKUDY, IDUKKI, PIN - 685604 BY ADVS. B.SURJITH RAHANA JOSE LIJO JOSEPH

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR IDUKKI COLLECTORATE, KUYILIMALA, PAINAV PO, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685603, PIN - 685603 2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER COLLECTORATE, KUYILIMALA, PAINAV PO, IDUKKI DISTRICT,, PIN - 685603 3 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER MURIKKASSERY POLICE STATION, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685604

¶10

BY SMT.PARVATHY.K-GP

¶11

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.02.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

W.P.(C)No.974 OF 2023

¶13

¶14

JUDGMENT Dated this the 14^th day of February, 2023

¶15

This writ petition is filed seeking the following

¶16

reliefs:-

¶17

“i. issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the Exhibit P2 and P3 orders.

¶18

ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 1^st respondent to consider and dispose of Exhibit P6 request within a time limit prescribed by this honourable Court.

¶19

iii. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 1^st respondent to conduct revaluation of petitioner's vehicle”.

¶20

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

¶21

and the learned Government Pleader

¶22

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the

¶23

petitioner that revision petition as against Exhibit P2 has been rejected by Exhibit P3 order only on account of delay. It is submitted that in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in Re:cognizance for Extension of Limitation v.v. [2022 (1) KHC 240], rejection of the statutory revision petitions without

¶24

W.P.(C)No.974 OF 2023

¶25

¶26

considering the merits of the matter is not proper and that the petitioner had submitted the revision petition within the time prescribed by the Apex Court in the light of the covid-19 pandemic.

¶27

Having considered the contentions advanced, I am of the opinion that the revision petition submitted by the petitioner requires a consideration on its merits. In the above view of the matter, Exhibit P3 order is set aside. There will be a direction to the first respondent to take up the revision petition submitted by the petitioner as against Exhibit P2 order and to consider and pass orders on the same on merits, after hearing the petitioner as well. Appropriate orders shall be passed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶28

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

¶29

Sd/ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE

¶30

SSK/14/02

¶31

W.P.(C)No.974 OF 2023

¶32

¶33

APPENDIX

¶34

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶35

		TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 06.12.2021 IN
Exhibit	P1	W.P.(C).NO.27741/2021 ON THE FILES OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT
		TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22.12.2021 IN FILE
Exhibit	P2	NO.RDOIDK/1127/2021-B5 ON THE FILES OF 2ND RESPONDENT
		TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24.08.2022 IN
Exhibit	P3	DCIDK/4329/2021-E9 ON THE FILES OF 1ST RESPONDENT
		TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 20.12.2022 ISSUED
Exhibit	P4	UNDER SECTION13 (2) OF THE SARFAESI ACT BY KERALA BANK
Exhibit	P5	TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF PETITIONER'S VEHICLE
Exhibit	P6	TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST LETTER DATED 16.12.022 SUBMITTED TO 1ST RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT DATED
Exhibit	P7	16.12.2022, ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF 1ST RESPONDENT
RESPOND	ENT EXH	IBITS
		A true copy of the letter no. V/3285/2021/I.D
Exhibit	R1(d)	dated 20-10-2021 of the Regional Transport Officer , Idukki
		A true copy of the letter of second respondent
Exhibit	R1(c)	dated 01-10-2021 sent to the Joint Regional Transport Officer , Idukki
Exhibit	R1(b)	A true copy of the seizure mahazar A true copy of the report of the Sub Inspector
Exhibit	R1(a)	of Police , Murickassery Police Station dated 22-09-2021 to the District Collector
Exhibit RESPONDE	R1(e) NTS' EX	A true copy of valuation report dated 18-10- 2021 of the Assistant Motor vehicle Inspector HIBITS: NIL

¶36

SSK //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

Subhash T S v. the District Collector Idukki

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subhash T S v. the District Collector Idukki

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sakkeer.a Vs the District Collector

Anas Property Developers Private Ltd. Vs the District Collector

Preethi Vs Senior Geologist

Siraj N.M. Vs the District Collector

Robin P R Vs State Level Environment Impact Assessmeny Authority

Eby Thomas Vs the Pampakuda Grama Panchayath