IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN FRIDAY, THE 25TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 3RD ASWINA 1931 WA.No. 1105 of 2007() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN OP.26623/2002 Dated 04/01/2007 .................... APPELLANT(S): 4TH RESPONDENT ---------------------------- PRADEEP.S., SARADA BHAVAN, KOCHULLUR, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA SRI.M.S.KALESH SRI.HARISH GOPINATH SRI.V.VINAY MENON SRI.KIRAN SANKAR RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 & 5 ------------------------------------------------ 1. K.G.SABU, MANAGING PARTNER, SABEENA INDUSTRIES, PLOT NO.40, INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AREA, KOCHUVELI, TRIVANDRUM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, TRIVANDRUM. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SHANGHUMUGHAM ROAD, TRIVANDRUM. 5. N.RAJAPPAN, T.C.31/512, 21 YMA ROAD, CHAKAI, TRIVANDRUM. R2 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI ARVID KUMAR BABU T.K THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & V.K.MOHANAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------- W.A. No.1105 of 2007 ---------------------------------------- Dated, the 25th day of September , 2009 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. The Writ Appeal is filed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge remanding the matter for fresh decision by the Government. The petitioner in the O.P. was the original allottee of government land for industrial purposes. However, on account of his failure to utilize full land, part of it was resumed and assigned to respondents 4 and 5 in the writ petition. The case of the petitioner was that the resumption of land and allotment to respondents 4 and 5 were without hearing which was found acceptable by the Single Judge and therefore the matter was remanded against which this writ appeal is filed by the 4th respondent. 2. We find force in the contention of the appellant herein against the judgment because repossession and re- allotment to respondents 4 and 5 in the writ petition were in the year 1999 and writ petition itself was filed in 2002. If WA No.1105/07 -:2:- the reallottees have developed the property and made thereon constructions by making investments, then there is no justification for this Court to interfere with such repossession or reallotment whether hearing was given to the original allottee or not. However, we do not proceed to dispose of the appeal on merit because even after remand, the government again reconfirmed their earlier order after giving notice to the original allottee. Since the appellant herein has no grievance based on the present order of the government, we close the writ appeal as infructuous leaving open the right to raise all grounds against the grievances, if any new case is instituted by the writ petitioner who is the first respondent herein. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE kvm/- WA No.1105/07 -:3:- V.K.MOHANAN, J. O.P.No. JUDGMENT WA No.1105/07 -:4:- Dated:..