IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 19TH JUNE 2009 / 29TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 37347 of 2008(U) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- PANTHIRIKKARA CO-OPERATIVE RURAL HOUSING SOCIETY, AVADUKKA PO., KOZHIKODE, REP. BY SECRETARY. BY ADVS. MR.K.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, SMT.SATHYA SHREEPRIYA. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. KERALA STATE FARMERS DEBT RELIEF COMMISSION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. AMMED.P., CHERIYAPARAMBIL VEEDU, PALERI. P.O. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. I.V. PRAMOD, R3 BY ADV.MR.SANTHARAM.P. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/06/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.37347/2008-U: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE R.3. DD. 16/01/96. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DTD. 16/01/96 EXECUTED BY THE R.3. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE REGISTERED MORTGAGE DEED NO. 669/96 EXECUTED BY THE R.3. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE AWARD IN ARC 896/03 DTD. 23/09/08. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE NOTICE ALONG WITH THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE R.3. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 11/07/08 IN APPLICATION NO. 21401/07/KK BY THE R.2. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. ANTONY DOMINIC,J. --------------------- W.P.(C).No.37347 OF 2008 ------------------------ Dated this the 19th day of June, 2009. JUDGMENT Ext.P6 is under challenge. 2. Ext.P6 is a final order passed by the 2nd respondent exercising its powers under the Kerala State Farmers Debt Relief Commission Act, 2006, granting debt relief to the extent of Rs.1,00,000/- to the 3rd respondent under Section 5(3) of the said Act. The challenge raised in Ext.P6 is mainly that the 3rd respondent is a teacher and not a farmer, who according to the petitioner alone is eligible for the benefit of the said Act. 3. The 2nd respondent has filed a counter affidavit, in which it is staged thus. “It is further submitted that from the records, it is seen that the Bench of this Commissioner, which disposed the application filed by the 3rd respondent, inadvertently omitted to take note of the fact that the 3rd respondent applicant is a WP(c).N.37347/08 2 teacher and therefore not a farmer. A teacher is not really entitled to debt relief. This Hon'ble Court may therefore, pass appropriate orders in this matter to meet the ends of justice.” 4. It is therefore evident that the Commission itself is accepting that the 3rd respondent being a teacher was ineligible for the benefit of waiver which has been granted by Ext.P5. Therefore Ext.P6 is unsustainable and is liable to be quashed and it is quashed. Writ petition is disposed of. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WP(c).N.37347/08 3