Eldo.P.V vs The State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 11296 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944
                     WP(C) NO. 19443 OF 2013
PETITIONER/S:

            ELDO.P.V.
            S/O.VARGHESE, RESIDING AT POOVATHINGAL HOUSE,
            KOLAGAPPARA.P.O., AVAYAL, MEENANGADI, KRISHNAGIRI
            VILLAGE, SULTHAN BATHERY TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT.
            BY ADVS.SRI.T.MADHU
            SMT.C.R.SARADAMANI
RESPONDENT/S:

    1       THE STATE OF KERALA
            REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
            REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
    2       THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
            LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT
            SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
    3       THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
            KALPETTA, KALPETTA NORTH P.O., WAYANAD DISTRICT-
            673122.
    4       THE ASSISTANT DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER
            OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER
            (GENERAL), KALPETTA NORTH P.O., WAYANAD DISTRICT-
            673122.
    5       THE MANANTHAVADY BLOCK PANCHAYATH
            MANANTHAVADY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
            MANANTHAVADY P.O., WAYANAD DISTRICT.
    6       THE TAHSILDAR
            VYTHIRI TALUK, VYTHIRI, WAYANAD DISTRICT.
    7       THE TAHSILDAR
            AMBALAVAYAL, AMBALAVAYAL, WAYANAD DISTRICT.
    8       THE VILLAGE OFFICER
            KRISHNAGIRI VILLAGE, WAYANAD DISTRICT.
OTHER PRESENT:

            ADV. B. UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL - GP
     THIS    WRIT   PETITION     (CIVIL)     HAVING    COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION    ON   02.12.2022,     THE     COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                            2

W.P. (C ) No. 19443 of 2013




                        MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., J
               ..........................................................
                       W.P. (C ) No. 19443 of 2013
               ............................................................
                 Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2022


                                  JUDGMENT

The writ petition is filed challenging Exts. P2, P3, P7 and P8

revenue recovery notices issued by the 6 th and the 7th

respondents. The petitioner and the 5 th respondent,

Mananthavady Block Panchayath had entered into Ext. P1

agreement authorising the Charitable Society of which the

petitioner is the Secretary to carry out 10 days workshop to 150

candidates sponsored by the Manathavady Block Panchayath to

train them to produce fiber from plantain.

2. Petitioner submits that the Society had successfully

implemented the above project and after verification of the bills

and vouchers produced by the society before the 5th respondent,

W.P. (C ) No. 19443 of 2013

the amount due was disbursed by the 5 th respondent.

Subsequently, on the basis of the enquiry conducted stated to

be conducted by the officer of the 4th respondent, without issuing

any notice to the petitioner, on account of the directions in R3

(a), it was decided to recover Rs. 2,52,00/- from the petitioner.

The petitioner also has a contention that the work was done by

the society and notices are issued to the petitioner in his personal

capacity.

3. Though the 3rd respondent has filed a counter, it is

seen that the specific contention taken by the petitioner that he

was not heard nor any enquiry conducted before issuing the

orders impugned is not denied. He also submits that the

quantification was done behind his back and that no amount is

due from the petitioner. This contention also is not specifically

denied in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the 3 rd

respondent. The counter only relies on Ext. R3 (a) and the

directions therein.

W.P. (C ) No. 19443 of 2013

4. In such circumstances, the Writ Petition is allowed,.

Exts. P2, P3 , P7 and P8 issued by the 6 th and 7th respondents are

quashed. In case, the respondents decides to proceed afresh for

recovery against the petitioner, they will issue notice to the

petitioner and afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to him

before passing fresh orders. The petitioner will be free to take up

all contentions available to him in response to the notice, if any

served on him.

The Writ Petition is allowed as above.

Sd/-MOHAMMED NIAS C.P. JUDGE ani/

/true copy/

W.P. (C ) No. 19443 of 2013

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19443/2013

PETITIONER EXHIBITS P1: COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 12.2.2009 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE 3RD RESPONDENT REPRESENTING THE 5TH RESPONDENT AND THE PETITIONER IN HIS CAPACITY AS THE SECRETARY NATIONAL BIO- TECH RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY.

P2: COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 11.12.2012 ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT.

P3: COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 11.12.2012 ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 34 OF THE REVENUE RECOVERY ACT.

P4: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 11.3.2013 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

P5: COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 5.2.2013 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

P6: COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 3.5.2013 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

P7: COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 25.6.2013 ISSUED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT.

P8: COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 34 OF

W.P. (C ) No. 19443 of 2013

THE REVENUE RECOVERY ACT.