Chacko Mathai vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 21296 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
  FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 7TH KARTHIKA, 1943
                     WP(C) NO. 10026 OF 2020
PETITIONERS:

    1       CHACKO MATHAI
            AGED 68 YEARS
            S/O. CHACKO, PADINJARE KALAYIL, KADUTHURUTHI
            VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM.
    2       MOLIKUTTY
            W/O. CHACKO MATHAI, PADINJARE KALAYIL,
            KADUTHURUTHI VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM.
            BY ADV S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI

RESPONDENTS:

    1       STATE OF KERALA
            REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, TAX DEPARTMENT, GOVT.
            SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
    2       INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION
            DEPARTMENT OF REGISTRATION, COLLECTORATE P.O.,
            KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 001.
    3       THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR
            DEPARTMENT OF REGISTRATION, COLLECTORATE P.O.,
            KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 001.
    4       THE SUB REGISTRAR
            OFFICE OF SUB REGISTRAR, KADUTHURUTHI P.O.,
            KOTTAYAM-686 604.
    5       EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
            PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, BUILDINGS DIVISION,
            COLLECTORATE P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 002.
    6       THE CHIEF ENGINEER
            PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, DESIGN AND
            ADMINISTRATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033.
    7       THE CHIEF SECRETARY
            GOVERNEMNT OF KERALA, GOVT. SECRETARIAT,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
            BY ADV SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN, SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER

     THIS    WRIT   PETITION    (CIVIL)     HAVING    COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION    ON   29.10.2021,    THE     COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C).No.10026/2020

                                   2




                    P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                     --------------------------------
                    W.P.(C).No.10026 of 2020
              ----------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 29th day of October, 2021


                            JUDGMENT

Petitioners are husband and wife. They are in absolute

possession and ownership of 8.09 Ares of property comprised

in Survey No.995/5/2 of Kaduthuruthi Village. In the said

property, the petitioners constructed a building and the local

authority issued numbers as KPX/812, 812-D, F, G H, I, J, K, M,

N, O and P to the building. According to the petitioners, office

of the 4th respondent enquired about a suitable building for

functioning of their office in 2017. Accordingly, the

petitioners offered their building and executed a consent deed

on 03.07.2017, permitting the 4th respondent to function

temporarily in the building owned by the petitioners. Based

on the said consent deed, the 4 th respondent Sub Registrar

inspected the building owned by the petitioners and demanded

the petitioners to construct additional facilities in the said

building. Accordingly, it is submitted that the petitioners W.P.(C).No.10026/2020

invested Rs.5 lakhs more and effected additional constructions

as directed by the 4th respondent and handed over the building

to the 4th respondent on 16.10.2017 and the office of the 4 th

respondent started to function there from that date onwards.

It is the case of the petitioners that the monthly rent fixed was

Rs.68,852/- after the Chief Engineer, Public Works Department

inspected the building. It is stated in the writ petition that the

Chief Engineer requested the 4th respondent to obtain sanction

from the Government for the payment of rent. Ext.P1 is the

order. In the building let out to the 4th respondent, the staff

strength of office of the 4th respondent is 9. Ext.P2 is the

letter issued by the 4th respondent narrating the details of staff

strength for the purpose of fixing rent. After issuance of

Ext.P1, it is the case of the petitioners that they approached

the 4th respondent for payment of rent. But, the 5 th respondent

reduced and re-fixed the monthly rent of the building as

Rs.47,962/- without even hearing the petitioner. Ext.P3 is the

order passed by the 5th respondent. It is the case of the

petitioners that Ext.P3 is an order passed without hearing the

petitioners and it is a unilateral decision by the tenants of the

petitioners to reduce the rent. But even that rent was not paid. W.P.(C).No.10026/2020

Aggrieved by the non-payment of the monthly rent by the 4 th

respondent, the petitioners submitted several representations

before respondents 1 to 4. Even lawyer notice was issued. The

petitioners approached the Taluk Legal Service Authority,

Vaikom in this regard. It is further submitted that

subsequently the 1st respondent issued Ext.P5 Government

Order by which the monthly rent is again re-fixed to

Rs.25,000/- with effect from 16.10.2017. It is the case of the

petitioners that Exts.P3 and P5 are issued without giving

opportunity to the petitioners. The counsel submitted that,

Ext.P5 is an order passed by the Government unilaterally

fixing the rent without even hearing the petitioners.

Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed with following

prayers:

i. Call for the records leading to Ext.P3 and Ext. P5 and quash the same by writ of certiorari. ii. Issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents No.1 to 4 to pay the monthly rent and its arrears with effect from 16-10-2017 as per Ext. P1 to the petitioner immediately. iii. Grant such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

W.P.(C).No.10026/2020

2. Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the

Government Pleader.

3. Admittedly, the Sub Registrar Office of the

respondents is functioning in a building owned by the

petitioners. It is admitted fact that the petitioners are the

landlords and the respondents are the tenants. It is also an

admitted fact that as per Ext.P1, the Chief Engineer fixed the

rent as Rs.68,852/- and subsequently, as per Ext.P3, the 5 th

respondent fixed the rent as Rs.47,962/-. It is further admitted

by both parties that Ext.P5 is an order passed by the

Government unilaterally reducing the rent from Rs.47,962/- to

Rs.25,000/-. If the respondents are not agreeable for the rent

suggested by the petitioners/landlords, they can very well

vacate the premises and find out other appropriate building.

They cannot unilaterally reduce the rent by issuing a

Government Order even without hearing the petitioners. The

Government Pleader takes me through the counter affidavit

filed by the 1st respondent and submitted that, the rent is fixed

based on certain guidelines. Whatever may be the guidelines,

unilateral fixation of rent by the Government, even without the

consent of the petitioners who are the landlord cannot be W.P.(C).No.10026/2020

accepted. According to me, Ext.P5 will not stand. Ext.P5 is to

be set aside and the 1st respondent is free to hear the

petitioners and take appropriate steps in accordance to law.

Therefore, this writ petition is allowed in the following

manner:

1. Ext.P5 order is set aside.

2. The respondents are free to consult the

petitioners and take appropriate steps

regarding fixation of rent, based on Exts.P1

and P3.

3. The decision as above should be taken, as

expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within

one month from the date of receipt of a copy of

this judgment.

4. The admitted arrears of rent should be paid to

the petitioners within one month from the date

on which the decision as above is taken.

Sd/-

                                        P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JV                                             JUDGE
 W.P.(C).No.10026/2020





                APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10026/2020

PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1        TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER

NO.CE/BL/KOTTAYAM/A1/RENT/8629/2017 DATED, 11.10.2017 ISSUED BY THE CHIEF ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.232/15, DATED 7.9.2017, ISSUED BY 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.D5/1976/16, DATED 26.4.2019, ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LAWYERS NOTICE DATED 28.6.2018, ISSUED TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER, DATED 11.2.2020, ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT.