IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2011 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 28777 of 2011(V) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- V.SEETHA LEKSHMI,AGED 48 YEARS W/O.UDAYABHANU, KILIVAYAL KOCHUPULIMOOTTIL VADAKKADATHUKAVU P.O.,ADOOR BY ADV. SRI. K.SHAJ SRI.SAJJU.S RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE GENERAL MANAGER, DIST.INDUSTRIES CENTRE, NEAR DISTRICT HOSPITAL KOZHENCHERRY, PATHANAMTHITTA-689654 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PATHANAMTHITTA - 689601 3. THE KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, PATHANAMTHITTA BRANCH REP.BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER 4. THE DY TAHSILDAR, REVENU RECOVERY, KFC, PATHANAMTHITTA - 689609. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. MOHAMMED SHAH. BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI.A.A.ABUL HASSAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: STU WP(C).No. 28777 of 2011(V) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS : EXT.P1:- THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DTD.10/11/2008 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, PATHANAMTHITTA EXT.P2:- THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DTD 10/11/2008 ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, PATHANAMTHITTA ON RECEIPT OF APPLICATION FEE EXT.P3:- THE TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER G.O(P) NO.115/2005/ID DTD 25/8/2005 REGARDING SCHEME FOR REVIVAL OF SICK SMALL SCALE INDUSTRIAL UNITS EXT.P4:- TRUE COPY OF LETTER DTD 16/12/2008 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P5:- TRUE COPY OF JEDGEMENT DTD 25/7/2011 IN WPC.19099/2011 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT EXT.P6:- TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTAION FILED ON 3/10/2011 BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// STU P.A TO JUDGE. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 28777 of 2011 V ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 3rd day of November, 2011 J U D G M E N T ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Petitioner had availed of a loan from the third respondent. Default was committed and according to the Standing Counsel for the Corporation, despite rescheduling the loan and giving One Time Settlement benefit, the liability was not cleared. Thereafter, recovery proceedings were initiated and the mortgaged property is scheduled to be sold. It is at that stage, this writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, seeking a direction to the first respondent to consider Ext.P1 application filed by her as early as on 10.11.2008 for registering her unit as a sick unit. 2. As rightly pointed out by the learned Standing Counsel, it appears to be yet another endeavour of the petitioner to stall the recovery proceedings. Be that as it may, now that such an application is stated to have been W.P.(C) No.28777/2011 : 2 : filed by the petitioner, without expressing anything on the merits and without interdicting the proceedings initiated by the third respondent, I direct the first respondent to consider Ext.P1 application and pass orders thereon, expeditiously, on the production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks/03/11 // True Copy // P.A. To Judge