IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 8TH MARCH 2011 / 17TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 7100 of 2011(J) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- JACOB GEORGE MUTHALALY, AGED 47 YEARS,S/O.M.G.GEORGE MUTHALALY, MALAYIL HOUSE,PERUNGALAM P.O.,ARINALLOOR, KOLLAM-690588 BY ADV. SRI.SHAJI P.CHALY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND FOREST, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY,SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, SHANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY 3. REGIONAL ENGINEER,DIVISION-II KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001 ADV. POOVAPPALLY M.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,SC.KSHB FOR R2-3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P. N. SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.7100 OF 2011(J) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of March, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a licensee of the premises mentioned in Ext.P1 lease deed. According to the petitioner, in view of the provisions contained in the lease deed, at the time of renewal, enhancement of lease cannot be more than 20%. It is stated that contrary to the conditions of the lease deed, the rate of lease was enhanced by 400%. When the petitioner objected, that was reduced to 100%. Even that was objected by the petitioner. This resulted in Ext.P11 and P14 orders passed, which even threatened the petitioner with eviction from the premises. Aggrieved by the aforesaid orders of the competent authority, petitioner filed Ext.P17(a) appeal before the first respondent invoking the appellate remedy under Section 87 of the Kerala State Housing Board Act, 1971. Along with the appeal petitioner has also filed Ext.P17(b) stay petition. The appeal and stay petition are pending and the petitioner apprehends coercive action on the basis of Exts.P11 and P16. It is at this stage the writ petition has been filed. WPC.No. 7100/2011 :2 : 2. I heard the counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent and the standing counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3. I record the submission made by the counsel for the petitioner that the agreed lease rental enhanced by 20% is being paid by him. 3. Admittedly, Ext.P17(a) appeal filed by the petitioner is a statutory one and therefore it is to be considered by the first respondent. 4. Taking note of the pendency of Ext.P17 appeal I direct the first respondent to consider the said appeal with notice to the petitioner and the respondents. This shall be done at any rate within 3 months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. It is directed that until orders are passed as above, subject payment of the rent as recorded above, further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P11 and P14 will stand stayed. Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the first respondent for compliance. Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WPC.No. 7100/2011 :3 :