IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH JUNE 2010 / 18TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 24945 of 2009(K) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------------------- ANURUP.K., MANAGING PARTNER, M/S.V.A.TREADS, BARAAS COMPLEX, PIRIVUSALA, CHANDRANAGAR P.O., PALAKKAD-7. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW RESPONDENTS: --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANGER. SRI. M.A. ASIF, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 24945 of 2009(K) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE LAND ALLOTMENT ORDER NO. 1/3395/2006 DATED 1/02/2007 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.1/5913/03 DATED 8/10/2007 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.1/5165/2006 DATED 7/8/2009 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE cms S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------ W.P(C) No.24945 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 8th day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner challenges Ext.P3 order passed by the second respondent cancelling the allotment of a site in an industrial estate for starting an industry. As per the conditions of allotment, the plot allotted should have been used for starting the industry within six months. Allotment was on 1.2.2007. For 2 ½ years the petitioner did not utilise the property for the purpose for which it was allotted. Therefore, by Ext.P3 order, the allotment was cancelled. The petitioner is challenging that order in this writ petition. The petitioner's contention is that petitioner could not start the industry within time because of circumstances beyond the control of the petitioner including the necessity of shifting of 11 K.V.line which passes by the side of the plot for which the petitioner had to incur huge expenses, which also required time. Therefore, the petitioner submits that if some more time is granted the petitioner can start the business. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, taking a lenient view, I direct the second respondent to grant the petitioner three more months' time to start the industry, for which the plot has been allotted W.P(C) No.24945 OF 2009 2 to the petitioner. In the meanwhile Ext.P3 order shall be kept in abeyance. If the petitioner starts the business within the said time Ext.P3 would stand cancelled. However, if the petitioner is unable to start the industry within the time stipulated, Ext.P3 would revive and petitioner shall surrender vacant possession of the plot to the second respondent immediately after three months unless the respondents in their discretion are prepared to grant further extension for valid reasons. The writ petition is disposed of as above. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE cms