IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JULY 2022 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 601 OF 2016
PETITIONER:
LAINA SHIJU
AGED 34 YEARS
W/O. SHIJU,
ATTIPETTI HOUSE
VELIYATHAMPARAMBU
NAYARAMBALAM POST,
VYPEEN
BY ADV. SRI.DENIZEN KOMATH
RESPONDENTS:
1 ELAMKUNNAPUZHA GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
MALIPPURAM POST
VYPEEN - 682 511,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2 DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATS,
CIVIL STATION,
KAKKANAD
ERNAKULAM.
R1 BY ADVS.SRI.AADITHYAN S.MANNALI
SRI.SAJAN MANNALI
R2 BY SRI. K.P. HARISH, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 01.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C.) No. 601/2016
2
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:-
"1) Call for the entire records pertaining to the issuance of Exhibits P-3, P-6 and P-7 and Issue a Writ of Certiorari, any other Order, writ or direction to quash the same.
2) Issue a Writ of Mandamus, any other Order writ or direction, directing the 2nd Respondent herein to hold an enquiry into Exhibit P- 5 grievance of the Petitioner, and to take appropriate decision thereon within a time frame.
3) Issue a Writ of Mandamus, any other Order, writ or direction, directing the 1st Respondent to refund the balance of security advance obtained from this Petitioner, after deducting the rent arrears for the period covered by Exhibit P-1 agreement along with legally enforceable interest immediately.
4) Such other reliefs that this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper to grant in the interest of justice.
5) Award costs of the proceedings."
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by Exts. P3, P6 and P7 notices issued by the Elamkunnapuzha Grama Panchayat demanding rental charges for the building occupied by the petitioner for the period from 2012, December to 2013, March; 2013, April W.P.(C.) No. 601/2016 3 to 2014, March; 2014, April to 2015, March; and 2015 - 2016. When petitioner received Ext. P3 notice, the petitioner has submitted Exts. P4 and P5 representations dated 21.07.2015. On receipt of the representations and at the request of the petitioner, the Panchayat has reduced the penal interest from the demand and directed the petitioner to remit the rent within five days. However, the petitioner has not complied with the same. It was thereupon that Panchayat has issued Ext.P7 notice dated 28.12.2015 directing the petitioner to vacate the premises within 24 hours enabling the Panchayat to start a homoeo clinic in the building in question. It is thus challenging the legality and correctness of the demands raised by the Panchayat, this writ petition is filed.
3. When the writ petition was admitted to the files of this Court, status quo was directed to be W.P.(C.) No. 601/2016 4 maintained for a period of one month and thereafter, it was being periodically extended and extended until further orders on 15.06.2016 which is still in force. The Panchayat has not filed any counter to the writ petition.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt. Mereena Joseph and perused the pleadings and material on record.
5. On a perusal of the demand and documents produced by the petitioner, it is clear that when the demand was received to pay the rent arrears, the petitioner has made a request to delete the penal interest from the demand. The Panchayat acted upon the request of the petitioner, removed the penal interest and directed the petitioner to remit the amount within five days. However, the petitioner has not remitted the amount due for the four years as specified above. It was thereupon W.P.(C.) No. 601/2016 5 that the Panchayat issued Ext.P7 notice directing the petitioner to vacate the premises.
6. On the analysis of the facts and circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that if the petitioner has agreed to pay the demand, if the penal interest is removed from the demand notice, the petitioner cannot rescind from the same and attack the demand and other proceedings.
7. In that view of the matter, I do not think that the petitioner has made out any case of arbitrariness or illegality on the part of the Grama Panchayat in raising the demand and also directing the petitioner to vacate the premises. I could not also locate any arbitrariness or illegality justifiable to be interfered in a proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the writ petition has to fail.
W.P.(C.) No. 601/2016 6 Accordingly, it is dismissed. However, I make it clear that if any rent amount is paid by the petitioner, the same shall be adjusted against the dues contained in the demand.
Sd/-
SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE DCS/01.07.2022 W.P.(C.) No. 601/2016 7 APPENDIX PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RENTAL AGREEMENT EXECUTED IN-BETWEEN PETITIONER AND 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RECEIPT OF PAYMENT MADE BY THIS PETITIONER. Exhibit P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 10.06.2015.
Exhibit P4 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 21.07.2015 BEFORE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P5 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 21.07.2015 BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P6 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 22.12.2015 VIDE RECEIPT NUMBER A3/131/15.
Exhibit P7 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28.12.2015.