IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2009 / 8TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 2937 of 2009(Y) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- V.R. WOODART LTD., PLOT NO. 42, COCHIN SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE, KAKKANAD, COCHIN 682 037 REPRESENTED BY IT GENERAL MANAGER AND AUTHORISED SIGNATORY DEEPA HEGDE. BY ADV. SRI.RAJIV ABRAHAM GEORGE SRI.EAPEN ABRAHAM GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, MINISTRY OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY, GOVENMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI. 2. THE DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, COCHIN SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY, ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING, KAKKANAD, COCHIN 682 037 SHRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ASST.SOLICITOR GENERAL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No. 2937 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 28th day of January, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is challenging Ext.P9, an order passed by the Estate Officer, appointed under the provisions of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, exercising his powers under Section 5(1) of the said Act. 2. In my view, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the said order of eviction, the remedy available to the petitioner is to pursue statutory remedy of appeal provided under Section 9 of the Act itself and nothing extraordinary has been made out to bypass the statutory alternate remedy. Therefore, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to seek appellate remedy that is available, this writ petition is closed leaving open all the contentions raised. The writ petition is closed. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg