IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 15TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 21535 of 2008(L) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): -------------------- C.T.N.AGRO & COIR PVT.LTD., 317/24, NORTH KULAMAKKAL, M.O.WARD ALAPPUZHA 688 001, REP. BY ITS ,MANAGING DIRECTOR, HARINARAYAN, S/O.C.T.NARAYAN, 41 YEARS, A.N.PURAM, SOUTH NADA, SOUTH GATE , IRAN BRIDGE,ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. MR.SHAJI P.CHALY RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM 2. THE KERALA STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., KESTON ROAD, KOWDIAR, THIRUVASNANTHAPURAM, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 3. THE PROJECT ENGINEER, INDUSTRIAL GROWTH CENTRE, CHERTHALA. R2 BY ADV. MR.M.PATHROSE MATTHAI, SENIOR ADVOCATE MR SAJI VARGHESE FOR R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.M.ASIF THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.21535/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE NEWS PUBLISHED IN INDIAN EXPRESS DAILY DT. 11.6.08. P2:- COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DT. 5.4.06. P3:- COPY OF THE LICENSE AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND 2ND RESPONDENT DT. 21.7.07. P4:- COPY OF THE BILL ISSUED FOR PURCHASING THE BUILDING MATERIALS DT. 9.10.07. P5:- COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DT. 1.4.08. P6:- COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS OF PETITIONER COMPANY ISSUED BY DHANALAKSHMI BANK DT. 26.6.08. P7:- COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DT. 4.6.08. P8:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DT. 11.6.08. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS R2(a):- COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 8.1.08 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. R2(b):- COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 19.2.08 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE tss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ----------------------------- W.P.(C) No.21535 of 2008 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of February, 2009 JUDGMENT Challenge in this writ petition is against Exhibit P7. Petitioner was allotted two acres of land at the Industrial Growth Center, Cherthala for the purpose of setting up an Industrial Unit for manufacturing Coir Tufted Mattings. Exhibit P2 is the order confirming allotment and Exhibit P3 is the licence agreement. Second schedule to the agreement, contains a specific programme for commencing production, in terms of which, the petitioner ought to have submitted an application for clearances, commencement of the construction, completion of the installation of plant and machinery and for commencement of commercial production. Admittedly the schedule has not been complied with. According to the respondents, in spite of Exhibits R2(a) and R2(b) notices dated 8/1/2008 ad 19/2/2008, there was no progress made by the W.P.(C) No.21535 /2008 2 petitioner and therefore, the State level Project implementation Committee, in their meeting held on 29/04/2008 decided to cancel the land allotment and this was conveyed to the petitioner by Exhibit P7. It is challenging this communication the writ petition is filed. 2. Although, petitioner contends that Exhibits R2(a) and R2(b) letters were not severed, the averment in the counter affidavit to that effect is not disputed by any reply affidavit. Therefore, I am not prepared to accept the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner in this behalf. 3. Yet another contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that there were two buildings in the land in question and tenders were invited for demolishing and removing the buildings belatedly. It is stated that therefore, he could not apply for building permit or commence the construction at the site. It is also stated that the petitioner has already applied for a building permit and that Panchayath has directed them to produce original W.P.(C) No.21535 /2008 3 records pertaining their title over the property in question. The petitioner even submits that they have already made substantial investments and will complete the procedural formalities and set up the Industrial Unit, if they are given an opportunity. 4. In view of the admitted default committed in complying with the Schedule fixed in the agreement, the respondents cannot be faulted for the steps that they have taken. However, in view of the anxiety shown by the petitioner to set up the industry, as they originally committed to the respondent in Exhibit P3 licence agreement, I am inclined to think that reasonableness require that the petitioner should be given another opportunity to get the licence agreement revived. Therefore, it is directed that it will be open to the petitioner to set approach State Level Project Implementation Committee, within two weeks from today with an appropriate application, giving specific proposal and time frame and with an undertaking to construct the Industrial Unit and commence commercial W.P.(C) No.21535 /2008 4 production, in which case, State level Project Implementation Committee shall consider the request and pass appropriate orders thereon. It is directed that subject to the petitioner filing the representation as above within two weeks from today, all further proceedings pursuant to Exhibit P7 shall be kept in abeyance till a decision is taken and is informed to the petitioner. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE scm