IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 8TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 17TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 32438 of 2010(D) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. KATTAPPANA HOUSING BOARD RENT PAYEES ASSOCIATION, KATTAPPANA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MANOSH CHERIAN, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.LATE C.P.CHERIAN, CHILUMBATH HOUSE, PAMPADANPARA P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT. 2. SAJU PATTARUMADAM, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O.GEORGE, PATTARUMADAM, P.O.KATTAPPAN, PRESIDENT, KATTAPPANA HOUSING BOARD RENT PAYEES ASSOCIATION. BY ADV. SRI.ESM.KABEER RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY, KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, IDUKKI DIVISION, KATTAPPANA. 685 508. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, IDUKKI DIVISION, KATTAPPANA.685 508. 3. THE CHAIRMAN, KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, TRIVANDRUM. 695 001. 4. THE SECRETARY, KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, TRIVANDRUM. 695 001. BY ADV. SRI.A.JAYASANKAR, SC, KSHB. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P (C) No.32438 of 2010 -------------------------- Dated this the 8th November, 2010 J U D G M E N T First petitioner claims to be an association representing the tenants of a building constructed by the Kerala State Housing Board at Kattappana which has been let out to various tenants. Second petitioner is a tenant in the said building. 2. This writ petition has been filed mainly complaining that the payments made by the tenants of the building in question have not been correctly accounted and that exorbitant and incorrect amounts have been demanded from the tenants. It is stated that aggrieved by such demands representations were made and that without considering those representations steps are being taken by the Housing Board to evict the tenants from the building in question. 2. I have heard learned standing counsel for the respondents also. 3. It is rightly pointed out that first petitioner is not an association recognised by the Housing Board and W.P (C) No.32438 of 2010 2 therefore, counsel takes serious objection about the locus standi of the first petitioner to represent the tenants in the building in question. It is also stated that even in the writ petition, complaints have been made only in so far as the demand made on five out of 54 tenants of the building in question. It is also stated that many of the tenants have not even refuted the demands. 4. Although learned counsel for the petitioner wanted me to recognise the representative capacity of the first petitioner, nothing has been placed on record to show that the first petitioner has been recognised by the Kerala State House Board as the bargaining agent for the tenants of the building in question. In that view of the matter, I accept the submission made by the learned standing counsel for the respondents regarding the locus standi of the first petitioner. 5. Be that as it may, in paragraph 4 of the writ petition that specific objection has been raised regarding the demands made on five tenants of the building in question. Therefore, I am inclined to think that at least W.P (C) No.32438 of 2010 3 those objections raised about five tenants should be considered by the respondents, subject to the condition that undisputed amount due from them is remitted. 6. In that view of the matter, it is directed that if Sri. Maneesh Cherian, Sri.Zakkaria Abraham, Smt. Suji Naveen, M/s.Federet Chits and M/s. NIFE remit an amount of Rs.40,000/- Rs.60,000/-, Rs.30,000/-, Rs.50,000/- and Rs.27,000/- respectively, the demands issued to them will be treated as notice and they will be free to file their objections. It is directed that remittance shall be made within ten days from today and thereupon they shall file their objections within one week thereafter. If objections are filed as above, that will be considered by the first respondent with notice and the actual amounts due from them will be quantified and fresh notice will be issued to them. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE ma