IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 29TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 8TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 22040 of 2006(W) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- M/S.WOODLANDS RUBBER WORKS, DEVELOPMENT AREA, AROOR, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER GEORGE VARGHESE. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, ALAPPUZHA. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE PARTNER, M/S.CLASSIC PAINTS, DEVELOPMENT AREA, AROOR, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.DILEEP MOHAN R4 BY ADVS. SRI.P.SANJA, SRI.A.PARVATHI MENON, SRI.JINU JOSEPH, SRI.M.MUHAMMED SHAFI. GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) N.22040/2006 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE, TRIVANDRUM DT.D 18.2.1980. P2:- COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BY THE THEN MANAGING PARTNER WITH THE GOVERNMENT DTD. 13 JULY 1980. P3:- COPY OF THE STATEMENT SHOWING DETAILED LAND VALUE AND ITS REMITTANCE BY CHELLAN. P4:- COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE AS S.S.I. UNIT. P5:- COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.D. 97/2004 DTD. 2 AUGUST 2004. P6:- COPY OF THE POLICY SURRENDERED BY THE PETITIONER IN THE NAME OF HIS WIFE NAMELY MARIYAMMA VARGHESE AND THE LETTER GIVEN TO THE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA SEEKING SURRENDER VALUE OF THE POLICY. P7:- COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF PAYMENT MADE TO THE ELECTRICITY BOARD TOWARD ARREARS OF ELECTRICITY CHARGES BY THE PETITIONER. P8:- COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, ALAPUZHA. P9:- COPY OF THE LETTER SEND BY THE PETITIONER TO THE DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE DTD. 22.3.2005. P10:- COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 13.4.05 ISSUED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, ALAPUZH. P11:- COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, ALAPPUZHA DTD. 26.4.05. P12:- COPY OF THE LETTER SEND BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 29.4.05. P13:- COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, ALAPPUZHA DTD. 9.6.05. P15:- COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE PETITIONERTHROUGH COURIER. P15:- COPY OF THE LETTER RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER BY REGISTERED POST DTD. 29.1.06. P16:- COPY OF THE EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 8.2.06. P17:- COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 17.4.06 BY REGD. POST TO THE GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES , ALAPPUZHA. W.P.(C) NO.22040/2006 P18:- COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, ALAPPUZHA , DTD. 18.7.06. P19:- COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER IN CONNECTIN WITH EXT.P18. P20:- COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER IN CONNECTION WITH EXT.P18. P21:- COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 29.7.2006 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE , TRIVANDRUM. P22:- COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE MANAGER IN CHARGE OF GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, ALAPPUZHA TO THE PETITIONER DTD. 5.8.06. P23:- COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE DIST. INDUSTRIES CENTRE AS SICK UNIT. P24:- COPY OF THE ENVELOPE RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER. P25:- COPY OF THE CERTIFICATES ISSEUD BY THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT WITH RESPECT TO SALE TURNOVER DURING THE PERIOD 2005 TO 2008. DTD. 16.12.08. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 22040 OF 2006 ===================== Dated this the 29th day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T The challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P22, an order issued by the 1st respondent resuming a plot alloted to the petitioner in the Industrial Development Area, Aroor and allotting the same to the 4th respondent. 2. Briefly, the facts are that, by Ext.P1 order issued in 1980, 33.5 cents of land in Sy.No.411/4-2 and 411/1A-2 of Aroor Village, Cherthala Taluk was alloted to the petitioner for setting up a small scale industrial unit. Ext.P2 is the hire purchase deed, which sets out the various conditions of hire purchase. Among others, in Clauses 13 and 14, it is provided that on the failure of the hirer to comply with any of the conditions of hire, the land is liable to be surrendered and in the event of failure to surrender, the hirer will be treated as a tresspasser with liberty to the respondents to resume the land. 3. The findings in the documents produced in this case is that from June, 1999, the industrial unit of the petitioner was lying closed. Notices were issued to the petitioner and he also WPC No. 22040/06 :2 : submitted his reply. Finally, Ext.P22 order was issued by the 1st respondent on 5/8/2006 resuming the land on the ground that the petitioner violated the terms of allotment. By this order, the land was also reallotted to the 4th respondent, who was already alloted a plot of land and had set up an industrial unit. It is challenging Ext.P22, the writ petition is filed. The main contention raised by the petitioner is that they having paid the entire hire purchase dues, the respondents could not have resumed the land. 4. Having considered this submission, I confess my inability to accept the plea for the reason that Ext.P2 hire purchase agreement authorises the respondents to resume the land at any point of time provided there is violation of the terms of allotment. Admittedly, the industrial unit was lying closed from June 1999 and if that be so, the closure of the unit evidences non user of the land for the purpose of which the land was alloted. This amounts to breach of the conditions of allotment entitling the respondents to resume the land. 5. On facts, it is also seen that pursuant to Ext.P22, the plot was handed over to the 4th respondent on 9/8/06, long before the filing of this writ petition. Counsel for the 4th respondent WPC No. 22040/06 :3 : submits that on the basis of the allotment, 4th respondent took over possession and is making use of the said plot for the purpose of his industrial unit. 6. Having regard to the fact that admittedly the terms of allotment was violated by the petitioner and as respondents were entitled to resume the land, I am not inclined to interfere with Ext.P22. Writ petition fails and is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp