Kerala High Court
Unnikrishnan vs Addl. Chief Secretary on 1 March, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 10TH PHALGUNA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 2681 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
UNNIKRISHNAN
AGED 59 YEARS
S/O. CHELLAPPAN,
PRATHEEKSHA,
MATHILI P.O,
PERINAD,
KOLLAM -,
PIN - 691001
BY ADVS.PRATHEESH.P
ANJANA KANNATH
RESPONDENTS:
1 ADDL. CHIEF SECRETARY
REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -,
PIN - 695001
2 THE SECRETARY
KERALA STATE ELECTRONICS AND INFORMATION DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -,
PIN - 695001
3 THE DIRECTOR,
KERALA STATE IT MISSION,
DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRONICS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY,
SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -,
PIN - 695001
4 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
CIVIL STATION,
KOLLAM -,
PIN - 691013
W.P.(C.) No. 2681/2023 2
5 THE AKSHAYA ASSISTANT DISTRICT CO-ORDINATOR,
AKSHAYA PROJECT OFFICE, ANDAMUKKAM, CO-OPERATION
BUILDING, CHINNAKADA, KOLLAM, PIN - 691001
6 THE TAHSILDAR
KOLLAM TALUK OFFICE,
NEAR KSRTC BUS STAND,
KOLLAM, PIN - 691001
7 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY,
GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001
SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 01.03.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C.) No. 2681/2023 3
JUDGMENT
Petitioner was conducting a Akshaya Help Desk in the
premises of the Taluk Office, Kollam from 2008 onwards,
evident from Ext.P1 agreement. According to the petitioner,
while so Ext.P6 order was passed directing the petitioner to
vacate the premises and close down the Akshaya Centre.
Apparently, the petitioner has approached this Court,
earlier by filing W.P.(C.) No. 28151/2020 and had secured
Ext.P3 judgment dated 21.08.2021, whereby the Additional
Chief Secretary was directed to consider the appeal filed by
the petitioner and dispose it of, after affording an
opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. Till such time,
the interim order granted by this Court was directed to be
continued with. Anyhow, consequent to the direction
issued by this Court in the said writ petition, the State
Government has passed Ext.P6 order dated 26.06.2022,
whereby it upheld the stand adopted by the Revenue
authorities and directed the petitioner to vacate the
premises. It is thus challenging the legality and correctness
of Ext.P6 order, the writ petition is filed. Anyhow, petitioner
has also submitted Ext.P7 representation before the
Additional Chief Secretary of Revenue seeking to allot a
space in the Taluk Office premises at Kollam. It is in the
said background that further reliefs are sought for in the
writ petition. When the matter came up for admission on
27.01.2023, the following order was passed.
This writ petition has a chequered history. Petitioner has
approached this Court earlier by filing two writ petitions and
directions were issued to consider the case projected by the
petitioner to remain in the leasehold property belonging to the
State Government.
"2. Today when the matter is taken up, learned
Government Pleader had invited my attention to the lease
agreement from where what I could find that the lease was a
conditional one by which petitioner was permitted to occupy the
premises of the Government on certain conditions. One of the
condition is that the petitioner shall vacate the premises, if the
premises is required for Government purposes. Therefore, the
Government invoking the said clause directed the petitioner to
vacate the premises. Accordingly, in the earlier writ petitions,
directions were issued to consider the representation submitted
by the petitioner to continue in the premises and till such time,
certain interim orders were passed to protect the interest of the
petitioner.
3. I have heard the matter extensively and I find that
since the lease itself is a conditional one, agreeing to vacate the
premises if the property is required for Government purposes,
the petitioner will have to find alternative premises to house the
Akshaya Centre. Anyhow, since the petitioner is in occupation of
the premises and it is a public service, it is better that
reasonable time is granted to the petitioner.
Therefore, the proceedings pertaining to Ext.P6 will stand
stayed for a period of one month. I make it clear that the stay
granted will confine to the petitioner only."
2. Apparently, it was on finding from the agreement
that the petitioner has agreed to vacate the premises, if
and when the authorities request so, the said order was
passed by this Court. Today when the matter is taken up,
learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
respondents have entered forcibly into the premises of the
petitioner and vacated the building and the building is also
demolished.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner,
Sri. Pratheesh P. and learned Senior Government Pleader
Smt. Deepa Narayanan and perused the pleadings and
material on record.
4. The discussion made above would make it clear
that building in question occupied by the petitioner was
demolished by the respondents. Learned Government
Pleader submitted that in fact on 06.01.2023, a notice was
issued to the petitioner which is not produced along with
the writ petition. I am not going into the legality of the
demolition of the building basically due to the fact that the
interim order granted by this Court on 27.01.2022 was
expired on 26.02.2023.
5. Whatever that be, learned Government Pleader
also submitted that rent arrears are due from the
petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner would be satisfied, if a direction is issued to
consider Ext.P7 representation by the Additional Chief
Secretary in the matter of allotment of the building to the
petitioner in the Taluk Office, Kollam. Learned Senior
Government Pleader objected to the direction sought for by
the petitioner. However, considering the fact that the
petitioner is running a, Akshaya Centre with the objective
of helping the public and take up their needs, it is only
appropriate that the Additional Chief Secretary, is directed
to consider Ext. P7 representation, however it can only be
on terms.
6. If any rent amount is due from the petitioner
consequent to the occupancy of earlier building, a notice
shall be issued by the Tahsildar, Kollam Taluk Office - the
sixth respondent to the petitioner within three weeks from
today. The petitioner is at liberty to file any objection to
the same, within one week thereafter. The issue with
respect to the rent, if any due, shall be adjudicated first
and further, the demand raised by the Tahsildar. If the
petitioner pays the rent Ext.P7 application submitted by the
petitioner shall be considered by the Additional Chief
Secretary, within two weeks from the production of proof of
payment of the rent due from the petitioner. If movable
articles including computers are removed when the building
was demolished, steps shall be taken to release the same
to the petitioner, at the earliest possible.
The writ petition is disposed of, accordingly.
Sd/-
SHAJI P. CHALY
JUDGE
DCS/03.03.2023
APPENDIX
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 THE COPY OF THE MOU ENTERED BETWEEN THE
PETITIONER AND THE 6TH RESPONDENT DATED
29.12.2008
EXHIBIT P2 THE COPY OF THE GO(RT) NO.171/2013/ITD
DATED 20.7.2013
EXHIBIT P3 THE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C)
NO.28151/2020 DATED 21.10.2021
EXHIBIT P4 THE COPY OF THE LETTER
NO.11/2022/REVENUE DATED 24.6.2022
ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH
RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P5 THE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C)
NO.28566/2020 DATED 11.1.2022
EXHIBIT P6 THE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. G.O(RT.)
NO.174/2022/RD DATED 26.6.2022 PASSED
BY THE GOVERNMENT
EXHIBIT P7 THE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY
THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST
RESPONDENT DATED 23.1.2023
EXHIBIT P8 THE COPY OF THE ORDER G.O(MIS.)
NO.24/2019/ITE DATED 30.10.2019
EXHIBIT P9 THE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR
NO.L3/55028/2008/REVENUE DATED
29.8.2009 ALONG WITH READABLE COPY
