The Manager vs Sri Veliah, No.1420 And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 1165 Ker

WP(C) NO. 2411 OF 2011                   1


               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                        PRESENT
            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
     WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 28TH POUSHA, 1944
                               WP(C) NO. 2411 OF 2011
PETITIONER/S:

             THE MANAGER
             NAGAMALLAY ESTATE, KALTHURUTHY PO,, KOLLAM-691 309.

             BY ADVS.
             SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR
             SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS
             SRI.P.GOPINATH
             SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR
             SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI



RESPONDENT/S:

       1     SRI VELIAH, NO.1420 AND ANOTHER
             NAGAMALLAY DIVISION, NAGAMALLAY ESTATE,, KALTHURUTHY
             PO-691 309, KERALA STATE.

       2     THE CHIEF INSPECTOR OF PLANTATIONS
             KOTTAYAM-686 575.

             BY ADV GOVERNMENT PLEADER


OTHER PRESENT:
          SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR

             SRI.RENJITH.T.R, SR.GP


        THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON    18.01.2023,        THE    COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 2411 OF 2011               2




                      P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
                 --------------------------------------------
                     W.P.(C.) No. 2411 of 2011
                    --------------------------------------
              Dated this the 18th day of January, 2022


                               JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers :

"(i) Call for the records leading to Ext.P4 order and to quash the same by issue of a writ of certiorari

(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 2nd respondent to re-hear the matter afresh on merits and pass order on Ext.P2 eviction petition filed by the petitioner.

(iii) To grant such other further reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case." [SIC]

2. The writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P4 order

passed by the Chief Inspector of Plantation invoking the

powers under the Kerala Plantation Labour Rules. The

application submitted by the petitioner for eviction of the 1 st

respondent under Rule 63 Sub-Rule (2) of Kerala Plantation

Labour Rules was dismissed for default by way of Ext.P1.

Subsequently, the second application submitted as evident by

Ext.P2 is rejected as per Ext.P4 stating that it is not

maintainable.

3. Today, when the matter came up for consideration,

the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the oral

instruction is that the 1st respondent is no more and his wife is

also no more. If that is the case, the writ petition itself can be

closed, with liberty to the petitioner to proceed if the legal

heirs are in occupation of the building. All the questions raised

in this writ petition are left open.

Therefore, this writ petition is closed, granting liberty to

the petitioner to proceed against the legal heirs of the 1 st

respondent, if they are in occupation of the building.

Sd/-

                                       P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
                                              JUDGE
SKS


                              APPENDIX


PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS           :


EXT.P1       TRUE COPY OF THE SAID ORDER NO. B2-2155/88 DATED

15.5.1993 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 27.3.2010 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P3 TRUE COPY FO THE OBJECTION DATED 30.7.2010 FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. B2-3009/09 DATED 18.8.2010 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL