IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 8TH OCTOBER 2010 / 16TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 26475 of 2010(H) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- A.ABDUL RASHEED, BADHARIYA MANZIL, NEDUMBANA, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.KRISHNA RAJ RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, KOLLAM.691 001. 2. DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695 0-01. 3. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES, KERALA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.691 001. 4. T.RAGHUNATH, THOPPIL VEEDU, THEKKUM BHAGAM WARD, KOLLAM.691 001. *ADDL. R5 & R6 IMPLEADED. 5. C.I. OF POLICE, KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION. 6. C.I. OF POLICE, POLICE CONTROL ROOM, KOLLAM. *ADDL. R5 & R6 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT.D 1.10.2010 IN IA. 13663/2010. R1 & R2 , ADDL. R5 & R6 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.DILEEP MOHAN R4 BY ADVS. SRI.N.RAGHURAJ, SMT.K.AMMINIKUTTY. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.26475/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENTS DT. 16.3.1995. P2:- COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE RESPONDENT DTD. 31.5.2001. P3:- COPY OF THE LETTER OF K.F.C. DTD. 6.4.2002. P4:- COPY OF THE LTTER OF K.F.C. DTD. 17.6.02. P5:- COPY OF THE LETTER OF K.F.C. DTD. 9.3.2007. P6:- COPY OF THE PROJECT REPORT DT. NIL. P7:- COPY OF THE S.S.I REGISTRATION DTD. 4.12.2008. P8:- COPY OF THE SANCTION LETTER OF KSEB. DTD. 5.3.2010. P9:- COPY OF THE SANCTION LETTER OF KSEB. P10:- COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DTD. 28.3.2008. P11:- COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE RESPONDENT DTD. 5.3.2010. P12:- COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DT. 29.12.2008 . P13:- COPY OF THE EXPLANATION OF THE PETITIONER DTD. 12.3.2010. P14:- COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE IST RESPONDENT DTD. 18.3.2010. P15:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP,11459/2010 DTD. 6.4.2010. P16:- COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER OF THE GOVERNMENT DTD. 19.4.2010. P17:- COPY OF THE INTERIM APPLICATION DTD. 26.6.2010. P18:- COPY OF THE REVIEW PETITION DT. 26.7.2010. P19:- COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE SIT RESPONDENT DTD. 18.3.2010. P20-:- COPY OF THE PAPER REPORT DTD. 20.4.2010. P21:- COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DTD. 24.8.1970. P22:- COPY OF THE ARTICLES OF AGREEMENT (FORMAT) DT. NIL. P23:- COPY OF THE BUILDING PLAN DT. NIL. W.P.(C) NO.26475/2010 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS R1(a):- COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 19.4.10. R1(b):- COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 29.5.10. R1(c):- COPY OF THE G.O.(RT) NO.43/86/ID DTD. 10.1.1986. R1(d):- COPY OF THE LETTER NO.25891/F1/86/ID DTD. 2.8.1986. R1(e):- COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DTD. 16.3.1995. R1(f):- COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 30.12.1993. R1(g):- COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 24.1.1994. R1(h):- COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DTD. 22.2.1994. R1(i):- COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 6.4.02 OF KFC. R1(j):- COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 30.11.2006. R1(k): - COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 28.4.07. R1(l):- COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 9.7.08. R1(m):- COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DTD. 8.12.09. R1(n):- COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 21.12.09 BY THE PETITIONER. R1(o):- COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 4.2.10. R1(p):- COPY OF THE REQUEST OF THE PETITIONER DTD. NIL. R4(a):- COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DTD. 25.3.2010. R4(b):- COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR RECEIPT OF MONEY DTD. 25.3.2010. R4(c):- COPY OF THE MAHAZER DTD. 31.3.2010. R4(d)l- COPY OF THE REPORT OF HANDING OVER OF PLOT NO.35 OF DP MUNDAKAL DTD. 31.3.2010. R4(e):- COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 25.5.2010 ACCORDING ADMINISTRATIVE SANCTION TO ESTABLISH/INSTALL AN 11 KV TRANSFORMER UNIT. R4(f):- COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.R4-13536 DTD. 18.5.2010 ISSUED BY THE KOLLAM CORPORATION. R4(g):- COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR RECEIPT OF MONEY TOWARD 2ND & 3RD INSTALMENTS. R4(h):- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION BEARING NO.K11/765/06 DTD. 30.5.2006. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 26475 OF 2010 (H) ===================== Dated this the 8th day of October, 2010 J U D G M E N T The whole controversy in this writ petition is regarding resumption and reallotment of a plot of land in the Industrial Estate, Mundackal, Kollam, which was originally alloted to the petitioner and now reallotted to the 4th respondent. 2. It is stated that in 1978, plot NO.35 in the Industrial Estate, Kollam was alloted to the petitioner for setting up a small scale industry. According to the petitioner, allotment is governed by Ext.P21 rules and P22 agreement between the parties. On the ground that the petitioner committed violation of the terms of the allotment, steps were initiated for resumption of the alloted plot in terms of the rules governing the same. Proceedings culminated in Ext.P14 order dated 18/3/2010 by which the 1st respondent ordered to resume the plot from the petitioner. 3. According to the respondents, by Ext.P19 order dated 18/3/2010 itself, the land was reallotted to the 4th respondent whose application for allotment of plot was pending. Ext.R4(c) is the mahazar prepared at the time of resumption and Ext.R4(d) WPC No. 26475/10 :2 : shows that the properties were handed over to the 4th respondent. 4. Challenging Ext.P14, petitioner filed WP(C) No.11459/10 before this Court on 31/3/2010 and that writ petition was disposed of by Ext.P15 judgment dated 6/4/2010 relegating the petitioner to pursue his remedies before the Government by filing an appropriate application within thirty days and this Court which was not appraised of Ext.P19 proceedings also had stayed re allotment in the meanwhile. According to the petitioner, in pursuance to the directions in the judgment, on 16/4/2010, he moved the Government and obtained an order staying the re allotment. Subsequently, Government issued Ext.P16 order dated 19/4/2010 continuing the order dated 16/4/2010. According to the petitioner, it was only later that he came to know of Ext.P19 and the subsequent developments and therefore he applied to this court by making Ext.P18 review petition for getting the period prescribed for disposal of the appeal before the Government. It is stated that the said application was considered and by order dated 26/7/2010, this Court directed that the appeal filed by the petitioner shall be disposed of within three months with notice to WPC No. 26475/10 :3 : the parties. 5. The appeal is still pending and in the meanwhile, in pursuance to Ext.P19, Ext.R4(c) and Ext.R4(d), the 4th respondent has taken further action for establishing an industrial unit and aggrieved by this, the present writ petition is filed. 6. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, the stand taken is that it was long before Ext.P15 judgment and the stay order passed by the Government that the land was resumed, reallotted and handed over to the 4th respondent. Further, from the pleadings, it would appear that on entertaining the appeal filed by the petitioner, after passing Ext.P16 order, Exts.R1(a) and R1(b) orders were issued, whereby, the General Manager of the District Industries Centre required the 4th respondent not to carry out developmental activities in the plot in question and according to the petitioner, this corder continues even as on date. 7. Thus the factual position is that the Government have entertained the appeal filed by the petitioner, passed an order of stay and the General Manager of the District Industries Center also issued orders interdicting 4th respondent from carrying out WPC No. 26475/10 :4 : any developmental activities in the plot in question. In such circumstances, I feel fairness requires that until the Government disposes of the appeal, which the Government should do as directed by this court in the order dated 26/7/2010, status quo as on date in so far as the plot in question, which is now in the possession of the 4th respondent, shall be maintained. 8. Therefore, without expressing anything on the rival contentions of both parties, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions; (1) That the 3rd respondent shall dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner against Ext.P14 order with notice to the petitioner and the 4th respondent as directed by this Court in the order dated 26/7/2010 in WP(C) No.11459/10. (2) It is directed that respondents shall maintain status quo as on date in so far as plot No.35 in the Industrial Estate, Kollam, Mundackal, which is presently in the possession of the 4th respondent in pursuance to Ext.P19 and Exts.R4(c) and R4(d) respectively. (3) If the 4th respondent so desires, it will be open to him WPC No. 26475/10 :5 : to move the 3rd respondent seeking variation of the orders enabling him to continue his activities in the plot in question pending disposal of the appeal, and if any such request is made, orders shall be passed only after putting the petitioner also on notice. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp