IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 28TH JUNE 2011 / 7TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 15465 of 2011(G) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ MOHAMMED NOUFAL C.K., S/O. KOYA, M/S. NCK INDUSTRIES, CHERUVALLIKUDY HOUSE, THRIKKULANGODE P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.SHIBILI NAHA SMT.A.LOWSY RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE, DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (KINFRA), KINFRA HOUSE, 31/2312, SHASTHAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 010. BY ADVS. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR,SC SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.P.GOPINATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.15465/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE DEMAND DRAFT DATED 11/9/2010. P2 COPY OF THE LETTER OF INTIMATION ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. P3 COPY OF THE DEMAND DRAFT DATED 7/2/2011. P4 COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 15/3/2011 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. P5 COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 17/3/2011. P6 COPYOF THE ALLOTMENT LETTER DATED 17/3/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.15465 OF 2011 -------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of June 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is stated as aggrieved of the enhancement of the lease premium from Rs.6,99,840/- to Rs.8,39,800/-, demanded as per Ext.P6, in respect of the plot alloted to the petitioner in the industrial area in Pathanamthitta district. Many a ground has been raised in the Writ Petition as to the concluded nature of the proceedings, contending that, the respondent is not justified in demanding anything more than the extented as stipulated in Ext.P2 allotment. 2. With reference to the contents of the statement filed on behalf of the respondent, the learned counsel for the said respondent submits that the proceedings sought to be relied on by the petitioner were happened to be issued without taking note of the enhancement of the lease premium, which ought to have been incorporated by virtue of the provisions with regard to the terms of the allotment. It is stated that the lease premium as originally fixed vide Clause 5 of Ext.P2 was Rs.34,99,000/- per acre, in the year 2008, which was to be enhanced by 20% over two years, as a result of which, it should have been Rs.41,99,000/- per acre in July 2010. This was unfortunately omitted to be noted W.P.(C) No. 15465/2011 - 2 - and incorporated, when Ext.P2 intimation was given to the petitioner, which hence was sought to be corrected by issuing Ext.P6. It is asserted that the said course has been pursued by the respondent in accordance with the relevant provisions of law and that, it is not assailable under any circumstance. The learned counsel for the respondent also submits that, the 'same rate' is sought to be realised from 'all the allottees' and that there is no question of any discrimination as far as the petitioner is concerned. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that, all the concerned allottees, other than the petitioner, have satisfied the due amount and as such, no interference is warranted in this Writ Petition. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner, taking note of the contents of the statement and the position as above, submits that, the petitioner will be satisfied, if some breathing time is given to satisfy the balance amount. 4. In the above circumstances, the petitioner is given time to clear the balance amount within 'four weeks', on satisfaction of which, the proceedings shall be finalised by the respondent, enabling the petitioner to have the benefit of allotment. It is also made clear that, if the petitioner turns to be a defaulter in satisfying the due amount as above, the respondent will be at W.P.(C) No. 15465/2011 - 3 - liberty to pursue further steps to cancel the allotment and to have it alloted to eligible persons in accordance with the relevant provisions of law. The Writ Petition is disposed of. vdv P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE