IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 12TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 23RD MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 1905 of 2006(B) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- M/S.PIZA CHEMICALS, CHEMICAL INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, AROOR, ALLEPPEY, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER BINU CHERIAN, RESIDING AT THOMMIKKUDIYIL HOUSE, PAINGOTTOOR P.O., (VIA) POTHANICADU, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY ADV. MR.ANIL SIVARAMAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, INDUSTRIES (D) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, ALLEPPEY. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES & COMMERCE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SHAIJAN.N.J., MUKKATH HOUSE, AROOR VILLAGE, CHERTHALA TALUK. R1 & R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR. P.K. RAVIKRISHNAN, R4 BY ADV. MR.BABU KARUKAPADATH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.1905/2006-B: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DTD. 01/09/1988. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. GO(MS).NO.169/69/ID DT. 05/04/1969. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE NO. 12307/87 DTD. 01/11/89 ISSUED BY THE R.2. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE R.2. TO THE PETITIONER FIRM NO. 09/01/09168/PMT/SSI DT. 31/03/93. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE INTIMATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE R.2. DT. 30/12/97. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER FIRM TO THE R.2. DT. 11/03/99. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE DEMAND ISSUED BY THE R.2. DT. 06/06/2001. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER FIRM TO THE R.2. DTD. 18/06/2001. EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 13/01/06 IN I.A. NO. 214/06 IN O.S. NO. 41/06. EXT.P.10: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 02/01/06 IN I.A. NO. 8/06 IN O.S. NO. 5/06 MUNSIFF'S COURT, CHERTHALA. EXT.P.11: COPY OF THE PLAINT FILED BY THE R.4. IN THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, CHERTHALA. EXT.P.12: COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE R.2. DTD. 13/12/2005. EXT.P.13: COPY OF THE EXTRACT SHOWING THE POWERS OF THE GENERAL MANAGER OF DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, G.O.(MS).NO.15/79/P & ARD DTD. 02/07/79. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. P.N.Ravindran, J. ================== W.P.(C) No.1905 of 2006 ===================== Dated this the 12th day of February, 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioner, a partnership firm, has filed this Writ Petition challenging Ext.P12 order dated 13.12.2005 passed by the General Manager, District Industries Centre, Alappuzha resuming possession of 12.075 cents of land situated in Sy.No.408/18-A1 of Aroor Village, Cherthala Taluk together with the building therein and reallotting it to the fourth respondent. The brief facts of the case are as follows: 2. The petitioner firm which was constituted in the year 1987 had applied to the General Manager, District Industries Centre, Alappuzha for the allotment of Government land in the Chemical Industrial Estate at Aroor for the purpose of setting up a small scale industry to manufacture French Polish and allied items. The said application was granted and a parcel of land 12.075 cents in extent, together with the building therein situated in the Chemical Industrial Estate, Aroor was allotted to the petitioner. Ext.P1 agreement dated 1.9.1988 was also entered into between the then Managing Partner of the petitioner firm and the General Manager, District Industries Centre, Alappuzha representing the Governor of Kerala. It appears that the business of the firm came to a stand still and thereupon they sought the permission of the General WP(C) 1905/06 -: 2 :- Manager, District Industries Centre to transfer the unit to M/s. Elmag Wires Pvt. Ltd. Upon receipt of the said application, the General Manager, District Industries Centre, Alappuzha sent Ext.P7 notice dated 6.6.2001 calling for certain clarifications and they were furnished by the petitioner in Ext.P8. Later, since the unit was not functioning, the General Manager, District Industries Centre, Alappuzha issued notice calling upon them to show cause why the land and the building should not be resumed and allotted to the fourth respondent. Ext.P12 order ultimately was passed on 13.12.2005 resuming the land from the petitioner firm and allotting it to the fourth respondent. This Writ Petition was thereupon filed on 19.1.2006 challenging Ext.P12 and seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to assign the land resumed from the petitioner to them under the Kerala Rules of Assignment of Government Land for Industrial Purposes, 1964. 3. The pleadings and the materials on record disclose that shortly after Ext.P12 order was passed, the fourth respondent had instituted O.S.No.5 of 2006 in the Court of the Munsiff of Cherthala against Sri. Karthikeyan, a partner of the firm for a permanent prohibitory injunction restraining him and his men from trespassing into the lands referred to in Ext.P12 and from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment thereof. In the said suit, an ad-interim order of injunction evidenced by Ext.P10 was passed on 2.1.2006 restraining Sri. Karthikeyan a partner of the petitioner firm from entering into the suit property (the WP(C) 1905/06 -: 3 :- property described in Ext.P12) or from interfering with the plaintiff's possession and enjoyment thereof. The petitioner thereupon filed O.S.No.41 of 2006 in the Court of the Munsiff of Cherthala jointing the fourth respondent as the defendant, praying for a permanent prohibitory injunction restraining him from trespassing into the suit property or from committing acts of waste therein. In the suit also, an ad-interim order evidenced by Ext.P9 was passed on 13.1.2006. 4. The fourth respondent has filed a counter affidavit contending inter alia that O.S.No.5 of 2006 instituted by him was decreed and that O.S.No.41 of 2006 instituted by the petitioner firm was dismissed. The petitioner has not disputed the said fact. Ext.P12 order was passed on 13.12.2005. Though this Writ Petition was filed on 19.1.2006, this Court did not stay the operation and implementation of Ext.P12. The fourth respondent has stated that he is conducting a business therein. The civil court has also decreed the suit filed by the fourth respondent and restrained the petitioner and their men from entering into the said property or from interfering with the fourth respondent's possession and enjoyment thereof. Therefore, as the civil court has injuncted the petitioner from entering into the suit property and as the lands have already been resumed from the petitioner, I find no reason to grant the reliefs prayed for in this Writ Petition at this distance of time. The Writ Petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. I make it clear that the dismissal of this Writ petition will not stand in the way of the WP(C) 1905/06 -: 4 :- petitioner firm claiming reimbursement of the amounts deposited by them, if they are entitled to for such reimbursement as per the rules governing allotment of Government land in industrial estates. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ess 28/2