Kerala Hydel Tourism Center vs The State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 22208 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
 FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 14TH KARTHIKA, 1943
                   WP(C) NO. 5941 OF 2016
PETITIONER:

          KERALA HYDEL TOURISM CENTER
          REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR,
          4TH FLOOR, VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 004.
          BY ADVS.
          SRI.P.SREEKUMAR
          SRI.P.K.ABDU RAHEEM
          SMT.MARY RESHMA GEORGE
          SMT.P.M.MAZNA MANSOOR
          SRI.K.NANDAKUMAR
          SRI.S.PRASANTH
          SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, KERALA HYDEL TOURISM
          CENTER
          SMT.UMA


RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE STATE OF KERALA
          COLLECTORATE, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM 682 030.


    2     THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
          OFFICE OF THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
          MUVATTUPUZHA 686 673.


    3     THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER
          BUILDINGS SECTION, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
          KOTHAMANGALAM 686 661.


    4     THE TAHASILDAR TALUK OFFICE
          KOTHAMANGALAM 686 691.
 WP(C) NO. 5941 OF 2016
                                      2

*ADDL.R5 SHAJI, S/O. KUNJAN, AGED 47 YEARS,
         PAYYANKKAL HOUSE,
         KUTTAMPUZHA KARA,
         KUTTAMPUZHA VILLAGE,
         ERNAKULAM DISTRICT , PIN 686 691.

             THE ADDITIONAL RESPONDENT NO.5 IS IMPLEADED AS PER
             THE ORDER DATED 28-02-2020 IN I.A. NO. 01/2020.


             BY ADVS.
             SHRI.K.P.JAYACHANDRAN, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL
             A.C.DEVASIA
             BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.A S DHEERAJ
             BY SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN




      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   05.11.2021,   THE   COURT   ON       THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 5941 OF 2016
                                    3



                      MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., J
                     -----------------------------------------
                        WP(C)No.5941 of 2016
                    ------------------------------------------
                 Dated this the 5th day of November, 2021


                             JUDGMENT

The petitioner is stated to be an organization

constituted to promote tourism activities in the hydel project

areas of the Kerala State Electricity Board and submits that it

is entrusted with the upkeep and maintenance of the several

properties owned and possessed by the Board. Alleging that a

property so entrusted to them in 1980, measuring 2 hectares

in Mannamkandam Village, which was leased to the Board by

the Forest authorities in connection with the construction of

Pooyankutty Hydro Electric Project, the 4th respondent

claiming rights over the said land started construction

activities which the petitioner questioned by approaching this

Court which resulted in Ext.P7 judgment.

2. By Ext.P7 judgment dated 26.10.2015 this Court

directed the District Collector to take an appropriate decision WP(C) NO. 5941 OF 2016

in the matter, after hearing the Electricity Board Officials, the

petitioner as well as the revenue authorities. It is seen that

pursuant to the said judgment, Ext.P10 decision was taken,

which is challenged in the present writ petition.

3. The petitioner argues that the decision was taken

without hearing them and in violation of the specific directions

issued in Ext.P7 judgment. It is also submitted that even the

Board was not heard as the notice issued to them was not in

the correct address. Be that as it may, there is no denial to

this contention about lack of notice to the petitioner and the

Board in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the first

respondent. In the said circumstances, without going into the

merits of the rival contentions raised in the above writ

petition, I quash Ext.P10 order on the ground of violation of

principles of natural justice as well as on the non-compliance

of the specific direction in Ext.P7 judgment. Consequently, I

quash Ext.P10 and direct the first respondent to take a fresh

decision with notice to the petitioner, KSEB as well as the WP(C) NO. 5941 OF 2016

revenue officials concerned and after giving all of them a

reasonable opportunity of being heard, within a period of

three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment. Till such a decision is taken and communicated to

the petitioner, the interim order granted by this Court on

23.02.2016 shall be in force.

Writ petition is allowed.

Sd/-

MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.

JUDGE dlk 5.11.2021 WP(C) NO. 5941 OF 2016

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5941/2016

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 4/2/1980 ISSUED BY THE FOREST DEPARTMENT EXHIBIT P2: A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE GRAMA PANCAYATH TO THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER DEMANDING THE PAYMENT OF PROPERTY TAX EXHIBIT P3: A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 31/8/2015 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P4: A TRUE COPY COPY OF THE LETTER ADDRESSED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 8/9/2015 EXHIBIT P5: A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P6: A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 31/7/2015 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P7:A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.32360/2015 EXHIBIT P8: A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 1/1/2016 ISSUED FROM THE 1ST RESPONDENT'S OFFICE EXHIBIT P9: A TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P10: A TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT R4(A): TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR IN PURSUANCE OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.