IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 17TH DECEMBER 2009 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 27911 of 2009(H) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. K.P.ABOOBACKER HAJI,S/O.MOOSA, KAKKADUMPURAM,A.R.NAGAR.P.O,MALAPPURAM (DIST). 2. C.K.KUNJHUMUHAMMED,PADIYIL HOUSE, A.R.NAGAR.P.O,MALAPPURAM-676 305. 3. K.C.MOOSAKUTTY, S/O.UNNEEL, KAKKADUMPURAM,A.R.NAGAR,MALAPPURAM. BY ADVS.MR.C.HARIKUMAR SMT.MOLLY KOSHY MR.T.K.SHAIJ RAJ RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR,(REVENUE RECOVERY) TALUK OFFICE,THIRURANGADI. 2. THE DIRECTOR,KERALA KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R2 BY ADV.MR.K.P.HARISH,SC,KERALA KHADI BOARD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 27911 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 17th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T 1. Petitioners are challenging revenue recovery proceedings initiated for realization of amounts due under industrial loan availed by them from the 2nd respondent Board for setting up a small scale industrial unit. Consequent to default committed in repayment of the amounts, recovery steps were initiated at the instance of the 2nd respondent and the petitioners were issued with Ext.P2 notice under Section 7 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. Various disputes regarding correctness of amounts demanded under Ext.P2 is raised in this writ petition. 2. By virtue of interim order issued by this court on 06.10.2009, which was subsequently extended on 05.11.2009, the petitioners have effected payment of an amount of Rs.1,50,000/-. Eventhough various contentions W.P.(C)No. 27911 of 2009 -2- were raised against the recovery proceedings, the petitioners are confining their prayer to the limited extent of permitting settlement of the account and payment of the entire arrears as per the settlement, in view of the fact that the 2nd respondent Board has got a scheme for 'One Time Settlement'. It is pointed out that the Secretary of the Board is the competent authority but the petitioner has impleaded the Director of the board. However it is submitted by the learned standing counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent Board that the Scheme for settlement is available till 31.12.2009 and if the petitioner makes proper approach, the same will be considered. 3. Having considered facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of relegating the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority under 2nd respondent for effecting 'One Time Settlement'. Accordingly the petitioner is directed to submit proper application before the competent authority seeking 'One time Settlement' on or before W.P.(C)No. 27911 of 2009 -3- 31.12.2009. It is made clear that the payment of Rs.1,50,000/- effected during pendency of this writ petition shall be appropriated against any pre-requisite amount necessary for considering settlement. On receipt of proper application, the competent authority under the 2nd respondent Board shall consider the same with opportunity afforded to the petitioners, and shall take a final decision thereof at the earliest. Decision taken in this regard shall be communicated to the petitioners and the petitioners shall be permitted to make payment of the amounts settled in accordance with the terms of the scheme. 4. Needless to say that further coercive steps pursuant to Ext.P2 shall be kept in abeyance till such time, decision is taken as directed above, provided the petitioner makes proper approach to the Board within the time stipulated as above. C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE shg/